What are the most annoying player habits!

[Whitewings]

Originally posted by BaronDread

Players who can't stand to have a chink in their defenses, or a less than perfect offense. I call them "Cause-and-Effecters". Usually their method of operation goes something like this...

 

Last game I had to fight a Desolid bad guy...I'm spending all my points to make my attacks affect Desolid characters!

 

Last game, my Entangle was escaped from by a villian with Teleport...I'm spending all my experience to buy "Can't be escaped with Teleportation" for my Entangle!

 

What's wrong with that? Iron Man's been doing it for decades.

[Whitewings]

Originally posted by Victim

The player that never learns simple rules. The one who always ask what to roll, when they've made millions of them. I found this most annoying in DnD, when someone would call for a X saving throw, and the player would ask every time.

 

I'll agree there, there was one in my second-to-last group. After an entire year of playing, she just couldn't get it though her thick head that you rolled a d20 for just about everything, or what her Feats were good for. And her SO was even worse; he understood the rules, yes, but he constantly insisted that he knew more about *everything* that anyone else at the table. I found this especially annoying because I really *did* know know about almost everything than anyone else at the table - him especially! You detune a harp for travelling, you don't replace its strings. Japanese daikyu were and are assymetrical so they can be fired when kneeling or on horseback, and so forth. He once spent twenty or so minutes trying to solve a mathematical sequence by applying numerological principles; I got fed up, pulled the drawing away from him, and solved all three sequences in my head in about 20 seconds (18 of which went to the last sequence; it was moderately difficult).

[SomeAsianKid]

I can't believe I forgot to add:

 

Rules lawyers who don't know the rules. I'm sure everyone here is reading this and going, wait a sec, that's an oxymoron. But I gamed with this one person who always brought out the rules, saying you can't do this, justifying his actions through this rule, except he was wrong 3/4 of the time! Seriously, he thought that a person could cast a spell in 3rd addition D&D for every base attack you get, so when a person's BAB is a +6/+1 you could cast two spells in one round...

[Lamrok]

Originally posted by SomeAsianKid

I can't believe I forgot to add:

 

Rules lawyers who don't know the rules. I'm sure everyone here is reading this and going, wait a sec, that's an oxymoron. But I gamed with this one person who always brought out the rules, saying you can't do this, justifying his actions through this rule, except he was wrong 3/4 of the time! Seriously, he thought that a person could cast a spell in 3rd addition D&D for every base attack you get, so when a person's BAB is a +6/+1 you could cast two spells in one round...

 

I'm sure everyone is reading that and thinking of multiple players. My favorite was a player during a GURPS game who insisted that if he fought on his knees he'd get extra defense (he was trying to force a ranged combat rule into melee). He was an ardent martial artist, too. gak.

[Patriot]

players

 

Un fortunately I have one who is all this combined!

- The Uber-Tweaker (aka the Munchkin) who will spend hours deciding on how to spend character points (Hero) or level-up (D&D) to make sure they have utterly maximized the effectiveness of the character.

 

- The Lose-Cannon who makes their characters as wild and care-free as possible so they can behave irresponsibly and recklessly in-game and have it be "in character" - yet they act surprised when the other players don't like it.

 

- The Loner who insists on making a character that doesn't get along with people or would never want to hang out with the rest of the party, even though they KNOW this is a party-based campaign

 

- The Same Guy Different Outfit (S.G.D.O.), who in spite of their best efforts to make each character unique and different, they are all, at their core, the same.

 

And Ive ranted about him often on the good old herogames board

[Avatar]

Remebered another one: Players who update their char multiple times. i.e. get a level in D&D and has to aply it right as the game is over, but next session states they never updated so they have to take up game time doing it again. I was never sureif he was an idiot or just leveling twice.

 

Another example are those people who seem to have a slightly different set of powers and abilities. " You said last game your Force Wall couldn't cover that much of an area. No, no, you must be nmistaken, its allways been this way."

 

Thats why I hold on to a copy of everyones char I play with if possible, especially in Champs, so I can go back later and double check them. I have seen people play a char with slightly different abilities almost every time we play. Makes me sick.

[Vondy]

I don't mind the occassional update or tweak as the character matures. I do mind when the player fails to inform and consult with the GM on said tweaks...

[Guest Thunder]

he he hmmm well lets see

 

I once played with a guy who though he was a nice guy should never be allowed to play a thief.

 

Second edition AD&D instead of just checking for traps he would go the over abundant rout of taking a half hour discussing the material the henge's where mad of before he went on to another part of a door. Relistic sure ... anoying Very.....

 

the guy that would sit there talking whether in or out of character he would talk non stop. eventually we turned that evening into paint night untill he quit coming. Nice but couldn't handle his mouth.

 

when I was running my own store I ran an open Ad&d third edition game which 15-25 people showed up every friday night to play. one evening I have this individual who did not know the rules what so ever but decided that he did sit at the other end of the table while I was trying to run and constantly bitch about how I had ruled on this or that etc. I tell you this was the first time that I had ever wanted to physically hurt someone over a game.

[Klytus]

Re: players

 

Originally posted by Patriot

Un fortunately I have one who is all this combined!

- The Uber-Tweaker (aka the Munchkin) who will spend hours deciding on how to spend character points (Hero) or level-up (D&D) to make sure they have utterly maximized the effectiveness of the character.

 

- The Lose-Cannon who makes their characters as wild and care-free as possible so they can behave irresponsibly and recklessly in-game and have it be "in character" - yet they act surprised when the other players don't like it.

 

- The Loner who insists on making a character that doesn't get along with people or would never want to hang out with the rest of the party, even though they KNOW this is a party-based campaign

 

- The Same Guy Different Outfit (S.G.D.O.), who in spite of their best efforts to make each character unique and different, they are all, at their core, the same.

 

And Ive ranted about him often on the good old herogames board

You have my deepest sympathy.

[nexus]

Players that are totally passive and refuse to do -anything-.

 

Players that have their character react in ways that just don't make sense to most sane people (and said character isn't described as insane), yet seem offended when NPCs and other PCs react to their odd behavior.

 

Players that get angry if in game actions have in game consequences and accuse you being a "Killer GM".

 

Players that create characters that are little more than thinly veiled sexual fantasies. They inevitably get bored with them and drop them a short while later. Note, this does not apply to games that are explicitedly stated as being erotic in nature.

 

Avatars. A player making a character than is basically themselves is generally a bad sign. They will be incredibly sensitive to what happens to that PCs and usually take in game things personally.

[Doug McCrae]

Originally posted by nexus

Note, this does not apply to games that are explicitedly stated as being erotic in nature.

!

 

Do they exist?

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Originally posted by nexus

Avatars. A player making a character than is basically themselves is generally a bad sign. They will be incredibly sensitive to what happens to that PCs and usually take in game things personally.

 

As someone who is _playing_ an almost avatar(Wraith. He's me, but with a superpower, and a fortune he inherited out of the blue... ), I have to say that it's more the second half that's the problem. (I based Wraith on me more as a thought exercise than anything else).

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

!

 

Do they exist?

 

Ever head of 'The Book of Erotic Fantasy?'

 

It had a cool cartoon at the end (Running a sex based game is a good way to get rid of ruleslawyers. Why? They know nothing about sex, so they'll go do some research, and realize it's more fun than RPGing... )

[nexus]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

!

 

Do they exist?

 

Oh yes. I've seen several.

[devlin1]

Originally posted by nexus

Oh yes. I've seen several.

 

Yikes.

 

 

 

I repeat:

 

Yikes.

 

 

Are you talking face-to-face or PBeM? PBeM seems a little more manageable, although I'd still steer well clear of them, but a face-to-face "erotic" game... that's just... no.

 

And it goes without saying that a LARP would be worse.

[devlin1]

Originally posted by WhammeWhamme

Ever head of 'The Book of Erotic Fantasy?'

Thank God this book has been published! I can't tell you how many times a quality game has been held up by a player asking, "Wait a minute-- what are the rules for her being on top?" or "How can I combine my love of gaming with my love of masturbating?" Now, at last, we have the answer!

 

Has this won an award for Most Useless Gaming Product yet? If not, when's the ceremony?

[nexus]

Mostly PBEM.

 

I've seen the Book of Erotic Fantasy. It does have some interesting things in it relating to love and sexuality in a fantasy setting. Useful role playing fodder for a more indepth, social style game, but it wouldn't be useful for the typical "dungeon crawls" thats for sure.

 

Its always struck me as odd how prudish the gamer community can be though.

[devlin1]

Oh, I'm not prudish. I'll do anything to anything, but in-character blowjobs aren't satisfying roleplaying fare for me. I just don't understand what would be attractive about sitting around with a group of guys graphically describing our characters having sex.

 

What "rules" could this book possibly have for love in a fantasy setting? Or sexuality? Wait-- don't answer that.

[austenandrews]

Originally posted by devlin1

Are you talking face-to-face or PBeM? PBeM seems a little more manageable, although I'd still steer well clear of them, but a face-to-face "erotic" game... that's just... no.

 

I ran a (face-to-face) romance game once that had a strong erotic element. One of the more ... interesting gaming experiences I've had. (Note: Self running for wife & female friend. Definitely not self running for group of scrubby gaming geeks.)

 

-AA

[devlin1]

Originally posted by austenandrews

I ran a (face-to-face) romance game once that had a strong erotic element. One of the more ... interesting gaming experiences I've had. (Note: Self running for wife & female friend. Definitely not self running for group of scrubby gaming geeks.)

I'd like to amend my earlier statement.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Originally posted by devlin1

Oh, I'm not prudish. I'll do anything to anything, but in-character blowjobs aren't satisfying roleplaying fare for me. I just don't understand what would be attractive about sitting around with a group of guys graphically describing our characters having sex.

 

What "rules" could this book possibly have for love in a fantasy setting? Or sexuality? Wait-- don't answer that.

 

Okay. Not my book; someone else at my gaming club had it.

 

There were rules for reproduction for the assorted non-human races. Including how long it takes for them to go to term, etc.

 

There were some suggestions for how each race would handle sex (Plants - Sex? Oozes - idiot hit Oooze, now there are two oozes. Yes, to an ooze, people trying to kill it is sexual... Most humanoids were more normal.)

 

There was an Alignment guide to sexual behaviour.

 

There were several sex based classes and feats (e.g. + to stats after sex, and a weird kind of spellcaster).

 

There was more, but those were the bits the guy reading it was inclined to point out.

[Guest WhammeWhamme]

Originally posted by devlin1

Yikes.

 

 

 

I repeat:

 

Yikes.

 

 

Are you talking face-to-face or PBeM? PBeM seems a little more manageable, although I'd still steer well clear of them, but a face-to-face "erotic" game... that's just... no.

 

And it goes without saying that a LARP would be worse.

 

Probably he's talking PBeM.

 

LARP could work for a very specific sort of person (could be fun to do a two player with a ready made scenario in a long term relationship... although applying rules is kinda weird... )

[nexus]

Originally posted by devlin1

Oh, I'm not prudish. I'll do anything to anything, but in-character blowjobs aren't satisfying roleplaying fare for me. I just don't understand what would be attractive about sitting around with a group of guys graphically describing our characters having sex.

 

What "rules" could this book possibly have for love in a fantasy setting? Or sexuality? Wait-- don't answer that.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean you in particular.

[devlin1]

Originally posted by WhammeWhamme

LARP could work for a very specific sort of person (could be fun to do a two player with a ready made scenario in a long term relationship... although applying rules is kinda weird... )

Yeah, because you know what? That kind of "LARP" is called "sex with a real human being," and I don't think I need yet another book for that.

 

"Hang on, honey-- let me check the stats. You're playing the Contessa, right? Okay, okay... and I'm the chauffeur... ah, alright. Here it is, page 7." *zzzip*

 

IMO, this kind of nonsense in a game is generally a sign of immaturity, not the opposite. But hey, to each his own.

[nexus]

Originally posted by devlin1

Yeah, because you know what? That kind of "LARP" is called "sex with a real human being," and I don't think I need yet another book for that.

 

"Hang on, honey-- let me check the stats. You're playing the Contessa, right? Okay, okay... and I'm the chauffeur... ah, alright. Here it is, page 7." *zzzip*

 

IMO, this kind of nonsense in a game is generally a sign of immaturity, not the opposite. But hey, to each his own.

 

I've seen it handled well, producing both some serious looks at sexuality and relationships between the characters. (and some well written erotica). And I've seen sniggering, juvenile things that was just painful to see. It takes a certain group to do it well (just like anything else, violence, comedy or anything can be ruined by immaturity), but I don't dismiss it off hand.