Obnoxious Player Moves

[Blue]

I had a player once who had literally EVERYTHING in the book. I mean, if there was a skill or power, he had it on his character. Obviously he had a fear of having to roleplay and wanted to just have roll for any situation that came up.

 

He only played one game with us. My players knew the risks and yet begged me to let him in. After the game session, in which he managed to destroy cities (thinking he was funny, forgetting he's supposed to be heroic), kill villains, and generally screw up the campaign world, I turned to my players after he left...

 

"This game never happened, and next time we don't call this guy to play."

 

They both agreed, and for the next three years I played champions with only two players.

[Vondy]

Re: Re: Re: So been there

 

Originally posted by Tech

I hope this doesn't come from personal experience, D-Man. I'm glad to say I haven't run into this much, actually only rarely.

 

In 23 years of gaming I have had 3 disruptive players in games I've run. I haven't had any in the past seven years. Its rare, but you do run across one occasionally. In two of those cases the players elected to meet the expectations and turned out to be positive additions. In one case I asked them to leave.

 

In games I haven't run... lets just say some groups are better than others.

[BlacKlily]

Thank you D-Man

 

I really appreciate your reply. It helped me go from pissed off and really leery of this next game where team work will be crucial to my player to some real good logical steps, some of which I can do today before the game tomorrow.

My husband already asked him to leave his game and his wife still plays, but the player bombed both my husband's email and the group site for three weeks straight and we were force to remove him off our game site log.

The player has a habit of really making these things personal.

[umbra]

Re: Thank you D-Man

 

Originally posted by BlacKlily

I really appreciate your reply. It helped me go from pissed off and really leery of this next game where team work will be crucial to my player to some real good logical steps, some of which I can do today before the game tomorrow.

My husband already asked him to leave his game and his wife still plays, but the player bombed both my husband's email and the group site for three weeks straight and we were force to remove him off our game site log.

The player has a habit of really making these things personal.

 

Hmmm, I've met some peeps like this in the past, and I hate to say it, they tend to act that way because I'm female.... Maybe that's happening to you. Really, it's not just me, they would treat anyone with boobs that way (and have), by really trying to bluster and fuss so loud and long to try to get you to give in to them. The funny thing is when they have male GM's they shut up.

[Vondy]

Re: Re: Thank you D-Man

 

Originally posted by umbra

Hmmm, I've met some peeps like this in the past, and I hate to say it, they tend to act that way because I'm female.... Maybe that's happening to you. Really, it's not just me, they would treat anyone with boobs that way (and have), by really trying to bluster and fuss so loud and long to try to get you to give in to them. The funny thing is when they have male GM's they shut up.

 

I hate to burst your bubble on this one but if you read her post its pretty clear that he had the same problem with her husband, who is presumably male, who booted him out of his game.

 

There are men such as you describe in the universe, but its not always the best course to immediately assume the issue is sex or gender bias. It quite frequently is something else entirely.

 

He didn't shut up with a male GM (the husband): he decided to bump chests and lost. Now he's moved onto the next GM. I've had a few players who bumped chests with me over the years. The fact that I'm male didn't stop them.

 

This guy has bigger problems than gender bias. He has general behavior issues that indicate a deeper emotional turmoil he needs to address in his life.

 

Pointing the PC finger at him won't stop the problem. It requires a rational and fair approach that can, if it fails, leave the GM with a good conscience when they say:

 

Don't come back.

[umbra]

I'm sorry, from her first post it sounded like she was the GM, not her husband, if she wasn't never mind.

[Karma]

Originally posted by RevHooligan

When I ran a 50 person White Wolf LARP, I changed the WW mythology as I saw fit. My werewolves weren't furry ecoterrorists and my mages weren't F''ing with reality. I had constant arguments about what powers antagonists had. "But the book says" was offically declared a conversation ender. As soon as I heard it, I just walked away and ignored the player.

I suppose that's O.k. if you tell eveeryone that you've changed the mythos and probably you shouldn't call it WoD. The problem with this attitude is that many people will use their knowledge of the mythgos to base their RP on, not because its OOC but because much of the mythos is IC. Werewolves 'know' they are fighting to save the world from destruction, Mages 'know' that reality is consensually based and 'if you believe enough you can do anything' so unless you described exactly waht the differences in the mythos were it was you who was being obnoxious about things. They may have been prefixing the sentence "In the book it says blah, so is that correct in the game or is it something different?" and by telling them to 'talk to the hand' you've simply made them continue to rely on their inaccurite knowledge.

 

Of course if they were complining about the powers they were supposed to have then more power to you.

[Enforcer84]

We had a guy like this (read all the modules before hand) in a group that I played with. I gamed with these ladies and gentleman for about 4 months, I was an elven ranger who was nobility and often picked on by the more expierienced characters...I started at 1st level they were all about 7th or 8th.

Anyway, everytime we went into a canned dungeon (the gm had his own world but often used existing adventures) this guy would run off on his own and get treasures he knew were out there. The DM would grumble but he never really did anything about it. I was getting pretty ticked because even though we passed notes to the DM it wasn't hard to see what he was doing.

So I started to talk to the other players about how his charactger always disappeared, and always seemed to have more money and cool things than the rest of us. They had known but never really worried about it, but their characters were upset. It was a roleplaying thing for them. I basically convinced them that he was stealing from us and that he might be working for our enemies (always disappearing and stuff). So we lynched his character after finding all sorts of magic items on his person.

The player left shortly afterwards.

[Karma]

I usually don't have this problem, I'm the 'keeper of the books' for the system I run and even if there is an argument I just say 'golden rules (1. the GM is always right, 2. when the GM is wrong see rule 1) and put up with no argument. Since I'm like that from the get go the players understand me. Sometimes I'll look up the argued rule later and discover I'm wrong and then apologise to the player next time, but during the game 'My Word Is Law'.

As for my own metagaming, I've been in situations where I have had knowledge of attributes etc. in my memory (I never look up the book during the game). For these situations I have the 'Metagame' skill ("Villian Lore" whatever) which I ask to roll to see whether I can use my knowledge. If I make it I say or do something that relies on my metaknowl;edge but sounds like its IC "I've heard he has specially hardened armor we should put more force into our attacks." If I don't make the roll then I keep my fool mouth shut and use a generic attack until I 'discover' that it isn't working.

[AnotherSkip]

Heh to give you an idea of how bad i was about AD&D 1st edition this really happened:

 

Gm Opens MM book where I can't see it.

He points at a critter (keep in Mind I dont even have the page #)

that I still cannot see.

He tells me "-8 AC, what is it's hit dice?"

I tell him "16"

He says" your wrong, its 200 hitpoints"

I respond with "The DMg Maxes out it's Thaco Chart at 16+ HD, all Greater Deamons with listed hit points fight at 16+ HD level according to the DMG... and since you told me it has 200 hitpoints it's Demogorgon on page 16 or 17...."

 

that forever made me in that group for any rules questions.

[BlacKlily]

I am the Gm

 

For Referance I am the Gm of both a scarred Lands and also a champions game.

We game twice a week with me and my husband alternating weeks on who game it is. He is just running a D%D game now.

[umbra]

Re: I am the Gm

 

Originally posted by BlacKlily

For Referance I am the Gm of both a scarred Lands and also a champions game.

We game twice a week with me and my husband alternating weeks on who game it is. He is just running a D%D game now.

 

Just wondering, did he treat you differently then he treated your husband when your husband GM'ed? Not trying to start an gender flame war, just interested in the guy's psychology.

[tmutant]

I guess I've been lucky. OOC knowledge has rarely been an issue in the games I've played or run as GM. I've always made it clear from the beginning that OOC is tabboo, though, because that was how I was brought into roleplaying by my first GM. In Champions, I've had my character recklessly attack Juggernaut because he had overconfident, and had no way to know it was Juggernaut. After recovering at GM's option, he called for help.

[Al_Beddow]

Originally posted by Klytus

D&D, on the other hand... its too much work to do custom stuff. I just have to endure players knowing the basics of some monsters - which is why they run into so many PC-class badguys or things like Ogres with levels in fighter.

 

That's why when I have problem players using OOC when IC, I do things like..

- give the monster a few more hit die

- Modify their natural attacks

- change the color so it looks like a new variant

- NEVER confirm or deny misconceptions on the players parts.

 

This last one is a great when used right. I was running a HM game pitting the characters agains "Orc Brigands." Now what the PC's had "heard" (read what the experianced players "remembered" is that "all orcs hate sunlight/bright light". I secretly made wisdom rolls for them and since most of them made it, confirmed that by saying "yep, you remember that the average orc hates sunlight/bright light."

 

Based on what they "remembered" they chose to attack the orcs just after sunrise so they would be groggy AND affected by the sunlight.

 

NOTE: Orc Brigands DON'T suffer from this.

 

Boy were THEY surprised!

[CrosshairCollie]

Or, better yet ...

 

"Hey, why are all those Orc Brigands wearing Ray-Bans?"

[zornwil]

Re: Thank you D-Man

 

Originally posted by BlacKlily

I really appreciate your reply. It helped me go from pissed off and really leery of this next game where team work will be crucial to my player to some real good logical steps, some of which I can do today before the game tomorrow.

My husband already asked him to leave his game and his wife still plays, but the player bombed both my husband's email and the group site for three weeks straight and we were force to remove him off our game site log.

The player has a habit of really making these things personal.

 

Sounds like his wife is in a really awkward position, I feel sorry for her.

[proditor]

I've been very lucky with my players in Table top. So far, I haven't yet hit a single determined rules lawyer or OOC fiend. Part of this has been taking a long time before adding anyone to my group on a permanent basis, part of it has been my speech (see below) but the lion's share has been a huge helping of pure luck.

 

I find the following speech works pretty well when starting with a new group though.

 

"I'm the GM. That means what I say goes. If you think I did something wrong or got a rule wrong, NICELY explain your point of view to me. After you have stated your case, I'll make a ruling on the spot. Sometimes it will be in your favor, sometimes it will not. BUT the matter is closed until the end of the session. If we spend the next hour arguing over the rules, no one has fun. And since that is the only reason I do this, it won't be allowed to happen."

 

Yes, it's pretty draconian, but after the first session most folk realize that this is about the only thing I am draconian about when I run a game. My main concern is for all of us to have fun and to tell a good story. Arguing facing for 2 hours achieves neither of those two goals.

 

As a sidenote, I staff on a MUX and OH LORDIE WHAT A DIFFERENT BEAST! I can match (and in some cases surpass) most of the stated horror stories on here. Of course, my online mantra has become "Why would I run for some of these people when in RL, I'd kick them out of my apartment?"

[Farkling]

A pont to AnotherSkip:

 

I am the rules lawyer for the group I GAME with. It's strange, I can handle superheoric/cyberpunk games just fine, but my Exalted games feel like Machiavellian Mage...I just don't seem to GM actual Anime sword 'n' Sorcery well. Our current GM does, but doesn't get all the nuts n bolts. If someone wants to use a Charm (read that as Power) in a way he doesn't think applies, he checks his index, and asks me to look it up. I understand the rules really well, and interp just as well. Such is the group opinion. Heck, White Wolf is a piece of cake next to HERO.

 

On the HERO side of it, I butted heads with the last GM I played with. He did NOT give me a listing of the house rules, and if he'd told me it was a Silver Age romantic campaign up front, I never would have played. Two of the players were very, um Bronze to Iron though...so I thought it was a Bronze or Iron gamee. I opted to spend my defense allotment on SPD and got to play a bona-fide speedster. That was a blast, that character concept hasn't shined so much since he was an NPC in 3rd edition days. I even spent 30 pts on the Transform to do Superspeed effects in an area.

Anyway, to reflect my knowledge of the rules, and that I frequently will figure DCV's in my head from the hit/miss rolls (combat is so sloooow in his HERO games), I bought a KS:Metahumans and a SC:Powers and SC:Power Suppression. Eidetic memory, Rapid senses (x100), and other sundry support to reflect how slow the world "seemed" to the speedster.

 

I need to get this off my chest...

I quit playing shortly after I was smacked down by GM fiat. Rapid senses, no PER roll (17-), and knocked unconscious by a power application that was PUBLIC knowledge, visible, and well documented to the heroes and superhuman databases of the game universe. Everyone knew except the metahuman expert who was established as a Stronghold consultant. Wasn't even given a chance to notice the attack and run. That would've been much more dramatic than knocking me unconscious for a few hours (real time, not game time).

His excuse? Planting explosives in the sewer tunnels under the villains warehouse headquarters wasn't heroic, so I was punished. The character had a Hatred of the leader, a dislike for the villains, and was trying to protect the city from the nefarious plot. The evacuation of the few people in the area was even arranged. One of the heroes was even helping him!

Ooops. Sorry. My apologies. That shouldn't be bothering me so much...it was just a game after all. It is just so exasperating to be punished for playing IN character, especially if you are an experienced GM.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: So been there

 

Originally posted by BlacKlily

I have a player that both upstarts me and my other players. I am very close to telling him to leave, which could cause problems with another player his wife.

This player read anything he knows you have for source material and also game lawyers. Problem is when he game lawyers he read only part of the ruling or explanation mid combat. This often forces me to stop and pull out the book to check the full then have to pass it around to all players to prove I am right.

Next he reads and makes notes on all villains out of any source book he thinks I have, I told the players in the beginning to not count on the villain write ups because I will be adjusting them for my campaign and the safest info for those with KS about villains and mutants should consult me with a roll not the books.

He throws fits when a villain uses something not in the books and often halts the game with his arguments. I am still working around it and the player now back me instead of him on rulings but it is still irritating.

Tell him to stop, and the next time he does it ask him to leave the table.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Blue

I had a player once who had literally EVERYTHING in the book. I mean, if there was a skill or power, he had it on his character. Obviously he had a fear of having to roleplay and wanted to just have roll for any situation that came up.

 

He only played one game with us. My players knew the risks and yet begged me to let him in. After the game session, in which he managed to destroy cities (thinking he was funny, forgetting he's supposed to be heroic), kill villains, and generally screw up the campaign world, I turned to my players after he left...

 

"This game never happened, and next time we don't call this guy to play."

 

They both agreed, and for the next three years I played champions with only two players.

Champions can be extremely fun with just 2 players. You can pull off Cloak & Dagger, Power Man and Iron Fist, even Batman & Robin (if 1 player doesnt mind being less points) or other Dynamic Duo type adventures....

[BlacKlily]

To the kindly rules lawyer

 

I never mess around with house rules. In respect to another rules Lawyer

(two I will call him) in my campaign who will hold his rules complaints off until after the game and brings the book with him and shows me his problems with my interpretations of the rules. I always do a type copy of the house rules for each player.

I wish that my other rule lawyer (the obnoxious game halter one) was more like the other one, because rule lawyer Two will at least wait until games end, and find all the rules he disagrees with to both show me and discuss them. Sometimes he is right and sometimes I am right, and sometimes it is open to interpretation, and he can accept that...too bad he cannot train the other rules lawyer in that.

[Arandmoor_Keet]

I used to play with a group of powergamers and left when the line "my LOWEST stat is an 18" was uttered in a D&D game that had been converted from ADND to 3rd ed.

 

The final straw was a fight against some undead that, and I quote, "should send everyone...even that panzy dwarf...running for their mommeys!". My elven fighter/mage just sat there and let the dwarf paladin (lowest stat 18 guy) kill everything after I missed one of them on a flanking attack rolling a 19. That was the LAST time I ever played with them.

 

Arandmoor

 

"If you ever hear the words 'Central Casting'...run like hell!"

[Doug McCrae]

Originally posted by proditor

I can match (and in some cases surpass) most of the stated horror stories on here.

Tell! Tell!

[Doug McCrae]

Originally posted by Arandmoor_Keet

"If you ever hear the words 'Central Casting'...run like hell!"

What's bad about Central Casting? I haven't used the books myself, but I was trying to find the superhero one a while back.

[proditor]

Originally posted by Doug McCrae

Tell! Tell!

 

It's a DND MUX, so....

 

We had the sorcerer who insisted she could lob 400 arrows in one attack with the telekinesis spell, each of them doing 1d8 damage. (The actual rule is 1 arrow per caster level)

 

We have the folk who want to make Prestige classes that are a combination (all abilites and a few more for good measure) of wizard and cleric.

 

We had the player who insisted I was trying to tell him how to run his PC when I informed him "You realize, if you try and stab that vampire, there is a good chance you'll hit the PC holding it in her arms". Funny, I thought my job as a DM was pointing out the possible repurcussions so that the PC didn't accuse me later of shoehorning them into bad actions...

 

Daily we have people who use the perform skill in rooms with no audience since they found a loophole in the code that means you can apparently get gold from heaven for a performance.

 

We had people abusing the CR system so that they were taking 18th level PC's on adventures with 1st level PC's so that they could fight something midway in between their levels and both would benefit. (Normally an 18th level character gets nothing in XP from a CR9 encounter, and a 1st level PC would just get slaughtered).

 

We had the guy with 5 stats at 14+ who dumped his INT to 6. After making this choice, he decided her got "cheated" by the rolls and actively tried to get other players killed becuase his initial stat rolls weren't high enough. (This is the same guy who insisted he deserved a +5 STAT increase book due to his "excellent RP of an INT 6 PC." He was 3rd level and asking for an item appropos for 18th+ level PC's). Now it all made more sense when he told us that in his TT game he got +5 books and +6 items for EVERY STAT at 1st level because his buddy was the king of the elves....

 

On the rules lawyering...well, I deliver the same speech at the start of every scene I run. I also let folk know that if they spend the time arguing during a plot, they face expulsion from the plot and the chance that I will never run for them again. Knowing the rules is a good thing. But, there are too many instances when a good GM has already considered what the rules lawyer is going to argue and made a judgement. That should be the end of it. On a MUX especially where any conversation is per force MUCH longer in duration because people have to type and this slows things to a crawl. If someone told me that they were leaving a game because they thought that I had cheesed them on a rule, without knowing the why, well, I'd hold the door for them and let them go with a smile on my face.

 

Basically, if you can name a rules hole in 3.0, they found it and exploited it for all it was worth.