"Oppressing Players"

[Al_Beddow]

Ok, you are probably wondering what I mean by "Oppressed Players"

Well, I have a few folks who really love to play in my games, but also love to continuously bitch about how my "playing by the rules as writting" is "F**king the players" and "Craming the rules down the players throat"

Here's the situation:
I am one of those GM's who believes in playing a game using the rules, as written. That is unless I see that something is very broken and I can come up with a "balanced" way to do it better. I run HackMaster and Hero 5th both by the book. These players know this. They've been playing with me for over 1 1/2 years now. And yet the seem to only "not like" the rules when they work AGAINST their characters.

So now I'm trying to figure out how to keep from being the "asshole GM" (in their eyes) and make my game "more fun" for them without me loosing my fun.

Any suggestions?

[RadeFox]

Add in 3 new rules to your game. Print the on the Screen where the players can see them.

1: The GM is always right- I follow the written codex of law, the Rulebook.
2: If the GM ever appears in error, resort to Rule 1.
3: If you can't or won't play by the rules, theres the door, and leave the chips. :p

In all seriousness though, it is not neccessary for you to be worrying about not hurting or oppressing your players. I'm assuming they know of your 'by the book' style, and they signed on and have played with you this long. If they weren't having fun, they would leave. If they want to discuss House Rules, save it for non-game times, or during the pizza break. But once you allow House Rules (not bad, mind you) once, be ready for a constant stream of new ones every week (also not neccessarly bad).

But in the end, its your time, your game, and you are the one that has to be happy. If your not, the games going to suffer, as well as you. Besides, ;) , a GM usually has no trouble finding players, not so the other way 'round!

[Derek Hiemforth]

You might also try pointing out that "playing by the rules as written" protects the players as much as hinders them. The rules are objective. They're written down, and everyone knows what they are. If you're playing by the rules as written, then you're not giving your villains an unfair break either.

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally posted by Al_Beddow
And yet the seem to only "not like" the rules when they work AGAINST their characters.


Well...the GM is god, true, but there's an unwritten corollary: without players there is no game. If they're not having fun when the rules are working against the characters, why not change 'em? The unwritten corollary to that, of course, is for you to say "You don't like the way I run? Here's the book, here's my character sheet. You run for a while."

[Al_Beddow]

Thanks for all the great feedback.

When I said "And yet the seem to only "not like" the rules when they work AGAINST their characters." I meant literally that they don't have a problem when that same rule hinders the NPC's/Monsters and favors the players. It boils down to their only likeing the rules when they FAVOR the PC's.



Add in 3 new rules to your game. Print the on the Screen where the players can see them.
1:The GM is always right- I follow the written codex of law, the Rulebook.
2: If the GM ever appears in error, resort to Rule 1.
3: If you can't or won't play by the rules, theres the door, and leave the chips :p

Y'know, these are cardinal rules in both HackMaster and Hero 5th, and the players know it. They also know I run a "by the book" game not only from experiance but because I make that clear to every person who sits down with us for even just one session.


You might also try pointing out that "playing by the rules as written" protects the players as much as hinders them. The rules are objective. They're written down, and everyone knows what they are. If you're playing by the rules as written, then you're not giving your villains an unfair break either.

Very true. and I pay extra attention to my rulings in an effort to watch myself and ensure I'm not ruling one way when it comes to the PC's and another way for the NPC's in the same situation.

Damm... I just need to get my Mojo back...

[RadeFox]

Make is an extra large Chocolate Mocha Latte Mojo, with whipped cream. :)
I hope all turns out well, in the end.

[Vondy]

Do the players understand the purpose of having rules?

Rules create a mathematical model for the simulation of reality that provides fair and consistant resolution of conflict.

I have a handful of house rules, but the rules are there for a reason and I prefer not to tweak them unless its absolutely necessary.

Stick to them.

[austenandrews]

In my view, rules exist to facilitate fun. If people don't enjoy a certain rule, I've got no problem ditching it. In general I have no problem blatantly favoring the PCs, if that's what everyone wants. On the other hand, my players don't usually fret overmuch about rules to begin with.

One technique I have started using is allowing players to choose whether or not to use various rules. If the player wants to roll hit location, they can. Otherwise a hit counts as a chest shot. If the player wants to roll damage, fine. Otherwise it's an average roll. (This can speed up combat greatly, btw.)

Then I give the NPCs the same option. In general thugs don't use a lot of optional rules. In more critical situations or against more dangerous NPCs, the PCs find themselves on the receiving end of more rules that can work against them. They don't complain about it, though, because they have the same options as the NPCs.

-AA

[Killer Shrike]

Draw them a map to the door.

Seriously though, how old are your players? This sounds like fairly immature behavior. Further, it indicates and adversarial mindset on thier part of Players vs GM. They need to reach the understanding that the GM is not thier enemy or opponent; he is a neutral and impartial party, there to set the stage and adjudicate outcomes. If they feel like they should benefit from rules which the opposition does not benefit from they should go play Warhammer Quest or something along those lines.

[Al_Beddow]

You guys are great, and you're why I love coming to these forums.

The players are all at least 23, and one of the problem children served time in the US Army. They all know the rules and know them quite well in fact. One of the two biggest violators is a fellow member of the HMGMA.

One of the big reasons I don't go changing rules as "easily" as these players would like is I am a member of the "Leigon of Heros" (teaching people how to play Hero System 5th ed) as well as a member of Kenzer&Co's "HackPack" (teaching people how to play HackMaster). This is in addition to running a "by the book game" IAW the rules of the "HackMaster Association", Kenzer&Co's version of the RPGA).

When you are trying to teach a person about a game, how it works, the flavor, how great it is, etc... you can't be tossing a bunch of "house rules" at them. If you do then you are not teaching them to play the game, but teaching them to play something that "looks like the game."

In this case, the players ASKED me to run the games knowing how I was going to run it "by the book". It's just when they get frustraited they about not being able to just "blow through the adventures" that they start getting an attitude.

Keep it coming folks, I'm loving every minute of our discussion.

[Vondy]

Personally I'm getting the sneaking suspicion that your players are trying to create a double standard that works in their favor. I'd just say "not going to happen" and move forward.

[Killer Shrike]

Army eh? Does he still need his mama around to feed and change him?

Sorry, cant resist a good dig on Army pukes.


OT: Just lay down the law and let em know thier options: Cope, GM, Walk. Pick any one.

[BoloOfEarth]

Don't know if this would work; it's getting late and I'm tired, so if this makes no sense, ignore it. Also, this kinda fits Champions or SciFi better than, say, Fantasy Hero or other genres, so it may not apply.

How about running a "The Rules Are Broken" night. Say "Just for tonight, I'm going to go ahead and ignore whichever rules you don't like. HOWEVER, I'm going to do the exact same thing for the bad guys. You want the 4th Edition haymaker (1.5x damage)? Fine, but wait until Grond hits you with it." Then, *every time* they pull something, pull the exact same thing on them. And just for shits and giggles, have them facing off against alternate-dimension evil versions of themselves. So they know what's coming, and from people with (hopefully) less restraint than them.

You seem like a pretty together guy, Al. (At least, I'd expect so from somebody in both the Legion of Heroes and the HackPack.) I'm wiling to bet that you can push any rules violation further than they can, and do it with a straight face.

Then, tell them you'll run the same combat strictly by-the-rules, and watch what happens. I'll bet they fare *much* better in the by-the-book version. That's one of the things rules are for, balance.

[Al_Beddow]

Originally posted by BoloOfEarth
You seem like a pretty together guy, Al. (At least, I'd expect so from somebody in both the Legion of Heroes and the HackPack.) I'm wiling to bet that you can push any rules violation further than they can, and do it with a straight face.

Thanks and yes, you are 100% correct. I've bent rules backwards that these guys haven't even thought about. :D

For everyone's entertainment, here is what I told these two in seperate e-mails...


Email the day of the "cursing out of the GM"
Guys,

Mike and I had a short talk after the game about what happened, and I just wanted to go back over it before we meet again to play.

You know my GMing style, especially when it comes to HackMaster. I don't go out of my way to screw over players (and defiantly don't "**** them over" as Kris so maturely put it). I put quite a bit of thought and effort into streamlining the rules while staying within the letter and intent of those rules. For games other than HackMaster I am open to changing the rules WHEN the existing rule is broken or just doesn't make sense. I am not here to play "Some game made up of mostly home made rules that only vaguely resembles <insert game system here>"

My insistence on playing "by the rules as published" is NOT "shoving the rules down the players throat" as Mike so delicately put it. If we were to all sit down and make our own game with all the rules we felt were the best, then as the GM I would expect us as a group to always follow those rules instead of only when it was convenient for the characters.


Today I put up with quite a bit of bitching, whining, complaining, inter-personal and inter-character conflicts. Ben and Josh were the only ones who didn't contribute to the problem. I thank God for that since J.W., Justin and the both of you were more than enough to try the patience of a saint.

I don't want to loose either of you as friends, the game isn't that important. I'm running the HM game because Kris asked me to run HackMaster for him. It's providing me a chance to game with friends with opening the world of HackMaster to new people as a benefit. BUT, if either (or both) of you are not happy with how I run my game there is only one real option - to stop playing. I can't take much more bitching at the table when I make a ruling that a player doesn't like, I can't take much more bitching because players/characters aren't getting along, and I will NOT tolerate one more incident of a player telling me that "The GM is just fucking them over."

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Al

The only response I got back was two sentences from the individual with the foul mouth telling me to "stop limiting my character by what I can and cannot do"


Email last Friday (still no response)First, let me state for the record that I have talked with the three players I have actually been able to get ahold of. I understand what J.W.'s comments were about and who they were aimed at, and don't have a problem with them.

Second, I am moving Hero to Tuesdays (alternating it with "Spycraft") and HackMaster is going to Wednesdays (because J.W. has physical therapy on Tuesdays)

Third:
The only response from you two to my e-mail with the subject "about today's game" was Kris telling to "stop limiting his character by what he personally can do." Amazingly, that did not come anywhere close to answering or addressing any of the points/issues I raised in that e-mail (I've included below).

So, what I need to know from each of you is are you going to respect me as a person and as the GM, or am I just going to be experiencing more of what was dished out to me by you two.

I'm going to be blunt but honest here... IF you choose to ignore me (by not replying or answering the question) or you can't at least promise that I won't be subjected to more of what I got the last time we gamed together, then please don't come anymore. I am NOT removing either of you from the game. What I am doing is removing that behavior from the game. The choice of whether or not either of you play in my RPG sessions any more is UP TO YOU. You know the rules, how I GM, and what I expect.

I'm looking forward to hearing from each of you.

Al

[CrosshairCollie]

Any chance we could get some examples of how these guys think that you playing by the rules is $@)$ing them over? I don't doubt that they're just being crybabies, but I'm curious as to what, specifically, they object to.

[Al_Beddow]

Sure..

HackMaster has a a number of mapping skills. "Joe", The player with the 'mouth', took them all.

In the begining I told him:
"If you want to make detailed maps you need to get something like a 50 foot rope and tie knots in it ever 10 feet like Eric suggested. If you want to use graph paper then have your character buy some paper/parchment and 'line it' during the time in between adventures or your resting in the tavern or something."

He refused to do any of this wanting to be able to just "map".

Then he decided to use his skill "hasty mapping" which will allow you to create relatively accurate maps on the fly. he has a 55% mastery of the skill (you can work your way up to %125% but a 95+ always fails). I wanted him to roll for every room or corridor (some reasonable middle ground), but he claimed he shouldn't have to and his buddy "Mark" was hounding me with "come on it's just mapping for godsake. How hard can this be" (umm... you're in a dark dank dungeon on the run using a lantern to see by and writing with a quill/a bottle of ink/on a rolled up piece of parchment).

Anyway, since Joe can't map worth a damm himself, I agreed to put everything on the battlemat and let him "copy it" with the understanding if he got it wrong he got it wrong, and this would replace rolling against his skill percentage.

Well I drew out this long corridor using 10 foot squars instead of my normal 5 foot squares (to make him expend a little effort other than just counting squares). The other players kept trying to tell him what the dimensions were. Some gave it in number of squares he should draw, some in feet, and others I just couldn't understand.

THIS is where Joe got upset and started mouthing off. He was embarrased, upset, and was having a very hard time with everyone trying to tell him what to do (he cant' even read a paragraph from the book if someone is talking).

So... Joe and Mark got mouthy with me and I ended the session befor I killed someone for the language and attitude.

[Killer Shrike]

"Joe and Mark, meet Door. Door, show Joe and Mark your other side."


Ill stutter in case plain speech isnt clear enough.....

G-g-g-g-g-g-BYE!!!!!!!

[Derek Hiemforth]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
"Joe and Mark, meet Door. Door, show Joe and Mark your other side."


Ill stutter in case plain speech isnt clear enough.....

G-g-g-g-g-g-BYE!!!!!!!
(DISCLAIMER: The following isn't aimed at Killer Shrike specifically... his post just triggered a pet peeve to talk about. ;) )

I always think this advice is offered too easily because it forgets one important detail:

These people are often your friends. Unless you have so many friends that you can just kiss some of them off, you can't just throw your friends out of the campaign because they cross you at some point. I don't know the specifics of Al's situation, so I'm not addressing that specifically. I'm just always bothered when the idea of throwing them the hell out is tossed out so cavalierly.

In real relationships with real people, you have to work on issues. If your only "gaming buddies" are people you met in a game store and never see except when rolling dice, I guess that's one thing. But for crying out loud... I've been gaming with some of the same guys for over 15 years. I've been to their weddings and they've been to mine. I'm not gonna tell one of them to show his ass to the door just because we have a gaming conflict.

"It's my way or the highway" doesn't give you many options for conflict resolution. :)

(Okay, soapbox mode off. ;) )

[Killer Shrike]

Read above where the player basically tells the GM to F off and verbally assaults him for his adjudication. Thats not friendly behavior.

There are boundaries in friendships and in gaming groups. The vary from group to group, but when they have been crossed they have been crossed and measures need to be taken.

Me, I dont form close relationships with many people, and I have still put many long standing friends out of games and out of my life based upon thier behavior either in or out of a game. No show? Gone. Bad attitude? Gone. Abusing the game or other players? Gone. Disrespecting me or taking advantage of my friendship? Gone.

Classic example; one of my old friends from the Corps. Served together, gamed together, hung together. Dude practically lived at my house on the weekend. When he got out and moved back to his home town and later moved back out I put him up for a month on the couch until he could get an apartment and got him not one but 2 high paying computer oriented jobs. We gamed together for years, and he was one of the best roleplayers I ever gamed with. However, he started cracking up and getting weird. He was always a little eccentric, but he started turning into a gun freak randomly, got real paranoid about the Millenium, stocking up thousands of rounds of ammunition, buying several 500 round drums for his AK-47, and getting really borderline. I tried to get him to seek some mental help but he insisted he was the sanest person he knew; it was the rest of the world that was crazy. After a while he got really inconsistent and isolationist, but he would still show up for the Saturday game and play his character even when he was completely unreliable in every other fashion. Then he missed a session without notice. Two days later when I tracked him down he was completely unconcerned; he hadnt realized it was Saturday he claimed; he went thru the whole day thinking it was Sunday. He shrugged it off, no big deal. I told him he needed help again and he just shook his head no. So I asked for his character sheet for my records and said goodbye to him. I never spoke to him again. Some people dont want to be helped. Point is, I would have let him continue to play even though he had fallen completely out of touch and had completely removed himself from interacting with me and our other long-time friends. But he became unreliable and no longer cared about the game. Its time for him to leave, for the best interests of all the other players.

When someone detracts from the game, they need to go away. If they are truly your friends, they will understand that just because you dont want them in your campaign doesnt mean you dont like them....

[Chris Goodwin]

It seems to me like there's a lot of issues going around in the group.

It looks like there were six players and one GM; out of those six players, it looks like four players weren't having fun. It's my understanding that two of the four went to the GM and asked for changes, and the GM was unwilling to make those changes. What the four should do in this case is say "We're not having any fun with this," and leave. It looks like what's been going on is some nasty e-mails. Is my assessment correct?

To be honest, we really don't need to see the e-mails involved; it looks like you're trying to hang your group's dirty laundry out in public.

You're perfectly within your rights to say "This is how I'm running, and (insert names) and I are enjoying it. I don't have any intentions of changing it. If you're not having fun with it, perhaps you'd be happier not playing." Perhaps you should address the issue in front of the group; doing stuff through e-mail, unless everyone is CC'd, can give the impression that things are happening behind people's backs, which can blow up in your face.

Anyway, I hope your group can get everything resolved to everyone's mutual satisfaction.

[Al_Beddow]

Originally posted by archer
It looks like there were six players and one GM; out of those six players, it looks like four players weren't having fun. It's my understanding that two of the four went to the GM and asked for changes, and the GM was unwilling to make those changes. What the four should do in this case is say "We're not having any fun with this," and leave. It looks like what's been going on is some nasty e-mails. Is my assessment correct?

Close..
The first two players I talked with were actually upset with the second two players (the same ones I am having a problem with). When I talked to the first two to find out what was bothering them they told me not to worry it wasn't my GMing, it was the other two getting all pissy for folks role-playing their characters.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by Al_Beddow
Thanks for all the great feedback.

When I said "And yet the seem to only "not like" the rules when they work AGAINST their characters." I meant literally that they don't have a problem when that same rule hinders the NPC's/Monsters and favors the players. It boils down to their only likeing the rules when they FAVOR the PC's.




Y'know, these are cardinal rules in both HackMaster and Hero 5th, and the players know it. They also know I run a "by the book" game not only from experiance but because I make that clear to every person who sits down with us for even just one session.



Very true. and I pay extra attention to my rulings in an effort to watch myself and ensure I'm not ruling one way when it comes to the PC's and another way for the NPC's in the same situation.

Damm... I just need to get my Mojo back... Tell them to stop griping and, if they don't listen, shut the session down when they start. Do this a couple of times to see if they get the hint. If they don't, find new players.

[KA.]

Al_Beddow,

Hi there. Sorry to hear about your situation. I have some opinions, and some advice. I hope that none of this comes off as either flip or insulting, because that is not my intent.

1) Rules - It is your job as the GM to enforce the rules.

It is also a police officer's job to enforce the law.
However, on the side of many of their cars it says:
"To Serve and Protect"

The side of a GM's car should say:
"To Have Fun, by Helping Others Have Fun, within the bounds of a game world."

My players consider me to be rather strict, and even somewhat evil. That is part of my job. The same way that most good cops are probably considered "tough" by some of the people they have to interact with.

But on the other hand, if a police officer chose to "enforce the law" by pulling over every car that exceeded the speed limit by 1 mph, would they really be "serving and protecting"?

They would be delaying and fining countless citizens with no real increase in public safety. They would be causing traffic jams that affected citizens who were doing nothing wrong. And they would be perceived as overzealous, making it harder for them to get the public's cooperation when something major was going on.

The two most "by the book" characters that I can recall from television are Barney Fife and Frank Burns. They both display a strong desire to enforce every rule at all times, but neither is exactly a respected figure.

While it is important to enforce the rules to keep order within the game, and to actually be "playing" the game you say you are, I have never played in a game where anyone put so much emphasis on the exact details of simulating "mapping".

My main concept has always been that maps are more of a convenience for the "player" than their "character".
After all, as a character, I could just "look around" to see what the room looked like. As a player I am totally dependent on what the GM tells me I see. Making my own map, to remind me what was where, seems to be a reasonable way to compensate for this. As a GM, I do insist that player maps are "what they think they saw" not "reality", so that if there is some question later as to exactly what is where, my rulings are final.

I understand that the mapping issue is just one example, perhaps not the best one, but I find it a little disturbing that you would expend so much energy on such a relatively minor thing.

If they are expected to note the time they spend putting lines on paper to make "graph paper", must they also expend money/time to obtain "pencils", "erasers", etc?
How far does this go?
It the player at the table wants to drink a Coke, must the character make his way to an inn and pay for a "mug of ale"?
If the characters are trapped in a cave with no food and water, are the players allowed to eat and drink?

I know that I am being ridiculously over-the-top here, but all I am saying is that you might want to lighten up a little bit on the "enforcement" issues, at least on very minor things.

2) Player Conduct - Here you have my total support. I do not know what sort of language you use when you GM, but based on what your players were saying to you, I have a major problem with their behavior. The GM does the vast majority of the work, and deserves respect for that if nothing else.
If they do not want to game with you they certainly have the right to leave. They do not have the right to be rude or disruptive. Period. Letting one of them take a turn as GM might be a very good solution to the problem. Most players have no idea what the GM puts into a session. It is all too easy to criticize, when you don't have to put in the work yourself. A session or two as GM can make a player much more appreciative.

One minor warning on this issue though : Tyranny breeds rebellion. If the players are getting the feeling that you are constantly trying to "keep them down", just to show that you are "smarter" than they are, and you are "the boss", they will become disrespectful.

This can be a very fine line.
I had one player in my Champions game whose main defense was a Force Field. He would often go charging into battle, without telling me that it was activated. And when he did, he would often get KO'ed by the first attack that hit him. He thought that this was unfair, and I told him that it was up to him to remember. After getting blasted a few more times, he remembered.
On the other hand, if a player told me that his character "got dressed", I wouldn't have him suddenly fall down a flight of stairs, saying:
"Your shoe was untied!"
"But, I said I got dressed!"
"Yes, but you didn't specifically tell me that you tied your shoes!"
That kind of GM'ing invites the players to rebel.

3) Whining In General - This I have a somewhat creative solution for.
Try to find for an episode of The Twilight Zone called "The Other Place".
Briefly - A petty hood dies. In the afterlife he finds himself surrounded by luxury, wealth, women, everything he wants.
He is surprised, because based on his evil life, he did not expect to end up in Heaven, he expected to end up in "The Other Place". As time passes, he becomes discontent. He wins every game he plays, he gets every woman he wants, he has all the money in the world. He starts to hate it. It's too easy.
Finally he tells his guide: "Something's wrong. I'm miserable here. I don't think I belong in Heaven. I think I was supposed to go to The Other Place."
To which the guide replies: "This IS The Other Place!"
If you want to solve your player's whining, just have an "Extra Dimensional Travel" adventure. Take them to a place where all their hits are critical, all their enemies loaded with treasure, all their attempts to detect things succeed, all their plans unfold perfectly.
Do it with a straight face for as long as it takes.
Eventually they will come to hate it. "It's too easy. There's no challenge."
Then let them know where they are! :)
Once they manage their painful escape from "The Other Place", they will be a lot less prone to whine. They may even start to get suspicious any time things are going too well.

Which is just where they should be.

In general, it sounds like things are getting a little too heated.
Maybe your group should take a one-week hiatus, and get together on the night you usually game, as friends, and do something else that you would all enjoy. Go bowling. Go to a movie. Do something to remind everyone that what you are most of all is friends trying to have fun together. After all, that is the point of all games, unless you are playing for money. ;)

KA

[Al_Beddow]

Thanks KA... I hear ya loud and clear.

I agree with you that enforcing every tiny rule in every way possible is just downright boring. The "measure" I apply to every proposed rule change is "Ok, what's broken or missing and how does this change unbreak it/fill the gap without unbalancing the game."

The first player (Joe, foul mouth) and I had a talk. His problem was he caught part of what I was saying to another player (actually to Mark). What Joe heard was "if joe can't map properly then his character can't and that's his problem. "

The entire statement was "listen, you've been complaining about enforcing the rules and endless die rolls. I'm not just going to ignore the game mechanic because YOU don't like it. I compromised by just drawing the map out and letting Joe copy it to the graph paper. If Joe can't map can't map properly then his character can't and that's his problem."


If they are expected to note the time they spend putting lines on paper to make "graph paper", must they also expend money/time to obtain "pencils", "erasers", etc?
How far does this go?
It the player at the table wants to drink a Coke, must the character make his way to an inn and pay for a "mug of ale"?
If the characters are trapped in a cave with no food and water, are the players allowed to eat and drink?
Actually, All I require of the players is to tell me they bought and lined the paper, and that "when" they did it could happen in game time. I don't care if they say the character took 3 hours to do the lining between the end of the last adventure or this one.

In HackMaster there are rules for: Armor Maint, Weapon Maint, Shaving & Grooming. All you have to do is "spend the appropriate amount each month for the materials and the needed time". I tell the players "just mark off buying the stuff, and at the end of the 'game day' before your character goes to be just tell me 'i'm doing my maintenance' and you'll be good to go." Two seconds and the entire thing is over with.

I've had players bitch and moan for 45 minutes over how unfair and "overbearing" that is (mark is one of them).

I do try to streamline things... using your example if they say "I'm getting dressed" I don't ask them to describe each item. It's "ok, takes 2 minutes... next" and we are done.

Most of the people I've played with aren't upset with this stuff. For Joe it was only hearing part of what I said that sounded like I was saying "screw him". Simple misunderstanding.

For Mark... he operates from the viewpoint that no system should go unchallenged and unchanged, no matter how good he is. He honestly feels that if in a 3rd ed D&D game that if everyone brings different books of feats that they should all be used and since that is like so many feets they should be allowed to pick TWO feats for every one feat they would normally get. As Joe found out when running a D&D game for Mark and some other friends... that is just crazy and paired back what books/feats they could use (needless to say, Mark was NOT a happy camper).

[Killer Shrike]

I have a solution: get rid of Mark. He whines too much and sounds like a munchkin. IMHO, YMMV, etc.....

[Derek Hiemforth]

Originally posted by Al_Beddow
In HackMaster there are rules for: Armor Maint, Weapon Maint, Shaving & Grooming. All you have to do is "spend the appropriate amount each month for the materials and the needed time". I tell the players "just mark off buying the stuff, and at the end of the 'game day' before your character goes to be just tell me 'i'm doing my maintenance' and you'll be good to go." Two seconds and the entire thing is over with.

I've had players bitch and moan for 45 minutes over how unfair and "overbearing" that is (mark is one of them).Not to pick on HackMaster, but I think the game system may be part of the problem. Although I think HM is a very playable update of 1st Ed. AD&D, and actually better in some ways, remember that on many levels, HackMaster is a joke. It's insanely over-detailed on minutiae, and it's that way on purpose. On some level, it's poking fun at having rules for Shaving and Grooming. :)

Perhaps these problem players don't get the joke, or don't want to play along with the joke, and lack the social skills to tell you that in a mature way. Although you may not be bringing the HackMaster rules hammer down hard on them, the HackMaster rules hammer is still a pretty darn heavy one. You can only hit just so lightly with it and still have it be HackMaster. ;)

Maybe what they're really trying to tell you is that they'd prefer a less rules-intensive game system...

[Blue]

I understand that players generally (with a few exceptions) want to play their cool characters, not book keep. To that end, they have a base already, "insurance" (so I don't spend all my time hassling them about collateral damage unless they do something really reckless; after all, they're supposed to be heroes), and I often let them arrive at the scene with full END, despite having flown/run/swam there. This is all to make the player's life easier and let them get around to what they enjoy: Hamming it up and kicking ass.

Now this approach works for me, but is certainly not universal. But what I find is that I've done most of this out of sympathy. I've bene in games where we had two weeks food to cross a one-month desert and had to try to hunt and book keep everything. It's totally reasonable to expect players to do this; it's just not what I call "fun".

But here's the thing: If a GM said to me "OK, make a roll" then you can bet that I make a roll. And I don't enjoy playing alongside people who think the GM owes them something for their effort. "I rolled dice/drew a map/scribbled down what the villain said. Now what do I get?". What you get is the ability to further the adventure.

I'm not sure how I'd handle players who argued with me when I told them they needed a roll for something. I guess there'd likley be a fight and an early end to the game as well. I try and be the easy-going GM and try to prepare everything well in advance of the game so that everyone has fun. If they aren't happy with my effort, if that's still not good enough, then they can run. Fortunately, as I've said, that's not been an issue. I consider myself blessed.

I should send all my players flowers to thank them for not being a pain in the ass. Well, maybe not. I'll just give them experience points; that's cheaper.

[Al_Beddow]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
I have a solution: get rid of Mark. He whines too much and sounds like a munchkin. IMHO, YMMV, etc.....

He did...

Without ever responding to one of my e-mails, he told others in the group that he would never play under me again and quit both My sanctioned HM games he was in. (he's been playing under me for over a year now...)

I'm surprised it took him a year to figure out how I play and that he didn't like it.

[Shaddakim]

So, any replies yet?


Yeah, I know it has only been a day, but I am curious about how this turns out. Please keep us posted.