PDA

View Full Version : Gamer Drama play or not to play



Talos
2014-03-10, 03:29 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Mrc.
2014-03-10, 03:35 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Often issue revolve around it being their house, nobody else able to meet on another day, a wish not to offend an old friend etc. Unfortunately lots of these issues are not in-game issues.

LibraryOgre
2014-03-10, 03:48 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

While a lot of people do want that, others want to play Mary Sues (I know of one guy who has been playing variations on the same character for going on 20 years, all with the same name, regardless of system, who frequently asks to be called by that character's name), be munchkins, or play some optimization concept they have. You wind up with a mixed group of these at any table, unless you're really picky about who sits at your table.

It comes down to who you game with. Do you game with a group of friends, who each have their own goals for the game and reasons for playing? Or do you play with a carefully selected group (who may still be friends) to create a certain environment? I've never had the second.

Dawgmoah
2014-03-10, 05:39 PM
It comes down to who you game with. Do you game with a group of friends, who each have their own goals for the game and reasons for playing? Or do you play with a carefully selected group (who may still be friends) to create a certain environment? I've never had the second.

Most of us do not, and never will, live in a place where you can carefully select your players. Often even changing the mix in the group can create problems with players who were very good; until the new person arrived.

I've always labored under the assumption that I can take a poor player and show them the way things are done better, at least in my opinion. Sometimes it works, other times not so much. I've moved on average every three years for the past thirty; and have played with a boatload of folks in that time. I wish I could go through the years and places and cherry pick the folks I felt were the best and brightest. Unfortunately some of them are dead.

Tengu_temp
2014-03-10, 05:45 PM
1. A part of being a good DM/player is trying to work out problematic behaviours when they appear, instead of an instant knee-jerk "begone from my game!" reaction.
2. Most people have flaws. Are you going to ruin your friendship with a good friend and a good player just because he's rules-lawyering sometimes, or because his characters are a bit Suish?
3. "Powergamer" is not a negative term. It just means someone who plays high-power characters.

Pex
2014-03-10, 06:03 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Because we are not righteous enough like you to know who is worthy to play the game. We do not have your foundation of brilliance to recognize those few individuals who share your awesomeness in aesthetics as to the proper way to play the game. We must suffer to have our BadWrongFun forever sighing in misery we can never have a taste of your nirvana of play.

Averis Vol
2014-03-11, 03:54 AM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

because many of us have removed the stick that was once firmly placed between our cheeks and accepted that some people have different notions of fun, and therefore accept our friends style and go on with it with little more than the occasional rolled eyes.

(Seriously, your post comes off as incredibly rude. Maybe you should learn to lighten up a smidge.)

Stoneback
2014-03-11, 07:00 AM
If you're sitting at a table, and you can't figure out who the a-hole is, its probably you.

Act accordingly.

Killer Angel
2014-03-11, 07:12 AM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Because things that can appear to be simple in theory, may be more complicated in real life.

Rhynn
2014-03-11, 08:45 AM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so)

Nope. Why would you hope that? I want to have some fun with my friends, and none of us are interested in any kind of extended improv theater or collaborative round-table story-spinning.


so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

For most people, playing RPGs is a social activity with complex dynamics involving friends, friends of friends, and acquaintances, and no one person usually has total control over who gets to participate.

Everyone involved is probably looking for a slightly different permutation of an experience that is very broadly the same thing, and everyone has different likes, dislikes, thresholds, and tolerances. Someone doesn't mind rules-lawyering, someone doesn't mind powergaming, etc.

For many groups, there's a relatively limited selection of available players, and for many players, there's only so many other players in their social sphere that they can actually play with.

Anyway, why are your desires more important than the desires of the people who want to powergame, be munchkins, rules-lawyer, or play Mary-Sues, and/or don't mind any of those things? Is it because you're the center of your universe? :smalltongue:

erikun
2014-03-11, 09:06 AM
The biggest problem is that, while a thoroughly immersive character-driven game certainly sounds good in theory, it is considerably taxing and not something that I want to devote focus on all the time. It is certainly not something that I will want to focus on all the time at the end of a 8-10 hour workday. Especially as the DM.

Also, it runs into the problem of needing to find players who want that as well. Most players seem less than interested in a game with only a single player.


A better question is: why aren't you running this game yourself already? After all, if you think that it should be so easy and that "most of us" want this anyways, then why don't you have your own group like that?

ElenionAncalima
2014-03-11, 09:22 AM
Most people would agree that these types of players are disruptive:
-The Mary-Sue who won't let anyone else do stuff and throws a tantrum everytime a flaw in their build is exposed.
-The Rules Lawyer who brings the game to a screeching halt to argue why the DM can't use that against their character
-The Powergamer who optimizes in a low optimization game...making the game not fun for anyone.
-The munchkin who spends 20 minutes resolving his turn, another 20 minutes arguing why his build is legal...and another 2 hours sulking when it turns out it isn't.

However, most of these archetypes come in many shades and variety.

A Mary-Sue might be a little eye roll inducing, but otherwise harmless. At least you know the player is invested in their character. A Rules Lawyer who isn't a jerk and doesn't just do it to benefit themselves can be actually be an asset to the table. Even powergamers and munchkins have their place at certain tables that enjoy testing out crazy and powerful builds more than immersion and roleplaying.

Vrock_Summoner
2014-03-11, 09:23 AM
If you aren't willing to have players like that in your group, that's your call. Some of us are accepting of people who have different ideas of fun.

... Otherwise, I'd never be allowed to play. :smalltongue:

Airk
2014-03-11, 09:48 AM
The actual answer is that most people prefer a game that's not very good for anyone (i.e. "a messy compromise between people who want different things out a a game") than to take the necessary and often difficult steps to get a less compromised game.

There are also people who don't really care what kind of game they are playing and are really just playing RPGs as an excuse to hang out with friends, so they could be playing Risk for all it really matters.

And there are people who feel that they can't not game with a given person, because "they're a friend" and you would...never...play a game...without any given friend? I dunno. This comes up a lot.

Note: I am not one of these people. I tailor my invites to games based on what kind of game I want. Yes, I am "privileged" enough that I probably have 10 whole people who will at least occasionally play games in my social circles. That number drops off a lot if I ask for people who want to play a game every week. I instead choose to play games somewhat irregularly so that I can maximize the enjoyment everyone gets out of them when they do happen, and for "hangout game night" we mostly don't play RPGs.

Big Fau
2014-03-11, 11:15 AM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

So where do you sit in that list of "ne'er do wells"?

Jay R
2014-03-11, 11:26 AM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game.

Statement of the form "most of us want X" are very often false, for almost any value of X. (The true statements in that form, like "most of us want food" don't need to be spoken.)


most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

It's not hard. And if picking perfect D&D players ever becomes more important to me than hanging with my friends, I'll do as you suggest.

Meanwhile, we have one power gamer we keep toning down, one player who won't learn the rules (so I create his character sheet), two character-driven players who approach it very differently, and two who are more focused on abilities but keep a character more-or-less in mind. I'm the DM, and I send the big gun after the power gamer, and plot threads connect to the character-driven players.

I like my friends.

Airk
2014-03-11, 12:05 PM
I like my friends.

Speaking of statements that don't need to be spoken.

But this is also a fallacious argument. Everyone likes their friends, but that doesn't mean there aren't friends you wouldn't want to play poker/get drunk/go out to a fancy dinner/go the driving range with. Some people are just capable of ruining certain activities for other people. That doesn't mean you're not friends with them, it just means you don't invite them to those activities.

The question is why we "tolerate" this sort of thing in gaming, and the answer isn't "because we like our friends", it's actually usually just "because we don't care that much."

Jay R
2014-03-11, 01:18 PM
The question is why we "tolerate" this sort of thing in gaming, and the answer isn't "because we like our friends", it's actually usually just "because we don't care that much."

Actually, no. For me, it's because I like my friends. I would rather play with Glen, Diane, Wil, Mike, Mary and Dirk than with six people who share my exact approach to gaming.

Talos
2014-03-11, 03:35 PM
Thank you guys for all your inputs. to answer some of your questions. I do GM and I love doing it. I do play occassionally. I like the RPing aspect of our hobby. charactor developement and background that make them interesting.

When you get players that can give you unexpected results in a game or make everyone move to emotion in charactor. that makes all the planning all the OMG they just blew by a weeks work because they found or did something that by passed your story.

In my games, i make notes about every one playing and give everyone time to shine and most times each one will get a story arc that emphasies their charactor.

I guess for me story trumps rules kinda guy, but by no means abuses the story that way.

For me lets game, then lets game. if you want to watch the game lets do that. if you want to BS and joke around lets do that. but not at the same time.

my point is is you have a guys that throws dice books and tables cause something happened to his PC, or someone ignores the game while it is not his turn then you have to explain the last 20 minutes to him, or has to look up every single thing where it is not fun to game. why have that person in your group?

Felhammer
2014-03-11, 03:36 PM
Not everything is as cut and dry as "X player is bad and Y player is good." Everything is shades of grey, especially when gaming with friends. Additionally, few people have the luxury of being too decriminalizing when it comes to player selection as there are only x number of RPers in your local area that can game on the day and at the time you need.

Honest Tiefling
2014-03-11, 03:44 PM
I assume this is in response to a certain type of thread, which I would think are often made for one of two reasons:

1) Help in approaching people and politely discussing a difference of opinion, or

2) Help in determining if the OP is being unreasonable and ways to deal with the situation.

If I asked everyone who differed from me in the slightest not to play, I would not have players nor be a good (Well, passable, maybe) DM.

Big Fau
2014-03-11, 05:02 PM
I guess for me story trumps rules kinda guy, but by no means abuses the story that way.

Being good at playing your character and being good at playing the game are not mutually exclusive skill sets. The key to all things is moderation, and this is as true of cooperative fiction as it is of RPGs.

Airk
2014-03-11, 06:47 PM
Actually, no. For me, it's because I like my friends. I would rather play with Glen, Diane, Wil, Mike, Mary and Dirk than with six people who share my exact approach to gaming.

You will observe the strategic use of 'usually' in my posting. Also, this doesn't mean that you don't wish Glen, Diane, Wil, Mike et al. were more in line with your tastes. :P Indeed, if they were far enough from them, you'd probably choose NOT to play RPGs with them, regardless of how much you like them. You'd play something else instead.

The Oni
2014-03-11, 06:59 PM
The badwrongfun is strong with this one. :smallannoyed:

The only question that matters is fundamentally, can every person at the table honestly say they are having fun? If the answer is yes, then you are doing it right, regardless of how you are doing it.

BrokenChord
2014-03-11, 09:20 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Hey. By the misconstrued derogatory definition, Mary Sues are always bad, but by their actual definition they're only necessarily bad characters in a writing format. In a game with defined rules, a Mary Sue character's only definite flaw is that the player is 99% likely to be a spotlight hog, and because mechanics you can punish them for doing it too much (or the dice might, as the case may be). Aside from that, a Mary Sue in tabletop gaming is just a self-insert with a cliche backstory, probably good looks, and either (or maybe both) an inferiority complex or a superiority complex. If you only control one character, after all, you can't just have everyone effortlessly love you for no reason, you can't auto-succeed all challenges, and you usually can't force everyone to keep you as the center of attention.

Alright, I'm done ranting about my anger at people who think Mary Sues are as bad for a table as munchkins and people who optimize way above the group and game standards.

Otherwise, your question is a good one. I heavily dislike people who try to hog mechanical spotlight completely. Everyone at the table deserves a chance to shine. And if you're going to make decisions without thinking about how it affects the enjoyment of others at your table, you shouldn't be playing with humans.

AuraTwilight
2014-03-11, 09:50 PM
I'll get back to you on that when I'm both able to play with whoever I want and am capable of knowing how people play games without giving them a chance to play.

BrokenChord
2014-03-11, 10:09 PM
I'll get back to you on that when I'm both able to play with whoever I want and am capable of knowing how people play games without giving them a chance to play.

Gee, your psychic powers must be blooming late. Can't you just tell? :smalltongue:

I think the OP meant figuring out their playstyle and choosing to continue playing with them when your playstyles are in disagreement.

Airk
2014-03-11, 10:17 PM
am capable of knowing how people play games without giving them a chance to play.

Don't be stupid and deliberately misconstrue things in an effort to be 'clever' and put down the OP. No one is saying you need to psychically determine who is undesirable to play with, but the number of threads on this forum alone indicate that there are plenty of people in the world who, for some reason, continue to play with people who basically ruin their game and their fun. And they don't need any psychic powers to figure that out.

AMFV
2014-03-11, 11:58 PM
most of us want a good, charactor emersive game. (at least i hope so) so why in the nines hells would the mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's be allowed in any game?

politely ask them not to play. why is this so hard?

Wait... you know people who are paid to be a pain in other's asses? How do I get in on this?

But seriously roleplaying is a social game and you're going to have different types of people in each social group. Most games I've been in have been people from school or people from work, and they're varied. Not everybody wants a good character immersion game, some people want to kill goblins, steal money and get phat lootz, some people want to have a dastardly maze of traps where not phrasing your actions correctly will get your character killed as the DM smirks, other people use roleplaying as a wish fulfillment system, some enjoy rules and systems and tend to absorb that sort of knowledge, and sometimes you're friends with people who are occasionally *******s, but are otherwise good folks.

As far as Mary Sues go, that's not even possible in a roleplaying game, the DM could create some, because he could have narrative control and use that to bend the world around the character but players have little to no real narrative control, so they can't create Mary Sues, now a player could hog the spotlight, but that's probably more a result of being boisterous and extroverted than anything else and should be addressed.

Tl;Dr: you play with all sorts of people because you have a diverse group of friends. Isn't that better than only being friends with people exactly like yourself?

AuraTwilight
2014-03-12, 02:08 AM
Don't be stupid and deliberately misconstrue things in an effort to be 'clever' and put down the OP. No one is saying you need to psychically determine who is undesirable to play with, but the number of threads on this forum alone indicate that there are plenty of people in the world who, for some reason, continue to play with people who basically ruin their game and their fun. And they don't need any psychic powers to figure that out.

English isn't my first language, but thanks for assuming the absolute worst of me and also insulting my intelligence. That's very mature of you.

That being said, my point is valid. Some of us don't have the social luxury of cutting people out of games once they've started, either because it's their house, or I'm not the GM, or they're a friend and the scenario is "Friends do Activity" not "Activity is being done, find Friends."

Or, you know, it's just kind of an assholish thing to do in some people's opinions to cut them out of a game after the fact because you dislike how they choose to enjoy the game. It's a pretty rude bait-and-switch.

AMFV
2014-03-12, 02:50 AM
Don't be stupid and deliberately misconstrue things in an effort to be 'clever' and put down the OP. No one is saying you need to psychically determine who is undesirable to play with, but the number of threads on this forum alone indicate that there are plenty of people in the world who, for some reason, continue to play with people who basically ruin their game and their fun. And they don't need any psychic powers to figure that out.

It's mostly because they would rather try to work the game to where it's fun for everybody rather than find new friends. And I don't think you can fault them for that.

Airk
2014-03-12, 08:43 AM
It's mostly because they would rather try to work the game to where it's fun for everybody rather than find new friends. And I don't think you can fault them for that.

No, you probably can't, but that doesn't mean it's not legitimate to ASK why the tolerate these people when they are clearly ruining their games. Without being accused of "LOL, do you think I have psychic powers?"

That's just being rude.

AMFV
2014-03-12, 09:40 AM
No, you probably can't, but that doesn't mean it's not legitimate to ASK why the tolerate these people when they are clearly ruining their games. Without being accused of "LOL, do you think I have psychic powers?"

That's just being rude.

Which I think was clarified as a language mistake, what is considered rude varies drastically from culture to culture. So what may have been intended one way was received another.

Devils_Advocate
2014-03-12, 12:25 PM
But Airk, no such accusation was made. AuraTwilight was just glib about the fact that one obvious reason one might be gaming with a problem player is because one didn't realize it was a problem player.

And equally glib about the fact that one may not be in full tyrannical control of the composition of one's gaming group, yet you don't seem to have a problem with that point.

Airk
2014-03-12, 01:14 PM
English isn't my first language, but thanks for assuming the absolute worst of me and also insulting my intelligence. That's very mature of you.

Shall I now claim that I would have needed psychic powers to determine that you're not a native english speaker? Would that be the 'polite' thing to do here?



That being said, my point is valid. Some of us don't have the social luxury of cutting people out of games once they've started, either because it's their house, or I'm not the GM, or they're a friend and the scenario is "Friends do Activity" not "Activity is being done, find Friends."

Where did I argue with this point? My entire issue is with you belittling the OP.



Or, you know, it's just kind of an assholish thing to do in some people's opinions to cut them out of a game after the fact because you dislike how they choose to enjoy the game. It's a pretty rude bait-and-switch.

Wait. So if someone enjoys playing monopoly by stealing money from other players when they're not looking, it's an "assholish" thing to not play monopoly with him anymore?

It is NOT a "bait and switch" to say "You're not playing the same game as everyone else, please go home?"

I REJECT your assertion that's somehow inappropriate to not play games with people who don't enjoy those games the way you do, especially when the conflict of enjoyment causes less enjoyment for everyone.

So no. The only valid point you have is the one no one is arguing.

But I'm sorry you feel insulted. I probably singled you out unfairly as this whole thread has been full of people making what I feel are unnecessarily snide responses to a fairly reasonable question.

erikun
2014-03-12, 03:01 PM
Thank you guys for all your inputs. to answer some of your questions. I do GM and I love doing it. I do play occassionally. I like the RPing aspect of our hobby. charactor developement and background that make them interesting.
Well then, congratulations. I have a difficult time trying to get a good group together, so it's nice to hear that you have one and it works for your gaming tastes. :smallredface:

I hope you get to play often.


my point is is you have a guys that throws dice books and tables cause something happened to his PC, or someone ignores the game while it is not his turn then you have to explain the last 20 minutes to him, or has to look up every single thing where it is not fun to game. why have that person in your group?
This, I think, is the real problem.

It's not an issue with munchkins or powergamers. It's not an issue with Mary Sues. It's not an issue with people preferring other aspects of gameplay.

It's an issue with someone showing up for a social activity, and then ignoring it for disruptive actions. It doesn't matter much if you're sitting down to play a RPG, or playing a video game, or watching a movie, or playing a sport. Having one person stop everything to talk on a celphone and then request everyone else to accommodate them is just rude.

As for why we put up with that? Sometimes due to lack of players. Sometimes due to not being able to kick someone out. Most frequently, I've found it's due to wanting to see the player improve, and so spending time with them despite their annoyances. However, if someone is being disruptive like that, they can simply be told to not show up until they're ready to pay attention to the game again.

Devils_Advocate
2014-03-12, 05:10 PM
Shall I now claim that I would have needed psychic powers to determine that you're not a native english speaker? Would that be the 'polite' thing to do here?
AuraTwilight didn't SAY anything about psychic powers! BrokenChord made a lighthearted JOKE about that and now you're attributing to someone something that that person never posted. :smallmad:


this whole thread has been full of people making what I feel are unnecessarily snide responses to a fairly reasonable question.
NEWS FLASH: People are responding rudely to the OP because the OP was rudely phrased!

First off, Talos used some derogatory terms for valuing character achievement, the Rules As Written, and/or getting attention under the explicit assumption that most readers aren't into that sort of stuff and just want a nice game where you can pretend to be a dwarf purely for the sake of pretending to be a dwarf. Which is a perfectly legitimate preference, but that's a ridiculous assumption to make about a group composed largely players of Dungeons & Dragons.

Secondly, the command form is, as a rule, coarse at best. "Have a nice day" is of course acceptable. "Have a Merry Christmas" is actually getting borderline. "politely ask them not to play" is asking for less than pleasant responses. That is what you're puttin' out the bait for when you tell people what to do, most of the time.

And how exactly does one politely ask someone not to play? "I cordially invite you to GTFO"? At the very least, I would think that the answer to "why is this so hard?" is obvious. Assuming that one is actually trying to be polite.

I'm not yet entirely sure that Talos doesn't think you should boot someone from your game the moment that you begin to feel less than entertained as a result of that player's actions. Of course, you could say it's obvious that no one would have such an extreme stance. But similarly, it's equally obvious that no one would hold the position that no player should ever be kicked out, no matter how disruptive. And yet you seem to be ignoring that in your response to AuraTwilight.

Furthermore? YOU have been the primary escalator of hostility in this discussion. Referring to someone's post as "being stupid" was considerably flamier than anything posted before that, and now you're repeatedly harping on something (a "psychic powers" crack directed at the OP) that never actually happened.

No one else has injected as much vitriol into this thread. Except possibly me, with this post.

<3<

AuraTwilight
2014-03-12, 11:40 PM
Shall I now claim that I would have needed psychic powers to determine that you're not a native english speaker? Would that be the 'polite' thing to do here?


I never said anything about psychic powers. Reading comprehension, along with giving people the benefit of the doubt ("is this person stupid or did he make bad word choice?") are both important social skills.

Social skills being what you'd need to apply when you're solving a social problem such as gaming preferences, mind you.

You know what would've been polite? Asking someone if you have doubts about their comprehension. "Er, did you forget the OP said [stuff]?"


Where did I argue with this point? My entire issue is with you belittling the OP.

I didn't belittle the OP; but you did belittle me and my point by insinuating otherwise, because it's inherently dismissive of the things I've said to reword them into an insult the way you did. I was answering the OP by giving a concise explanation of why 'this is so hard' for people like me, and then I elaborated in my second post in the thread.


Wait. So if someone enjoys playing monopoly by stealing money from other players when they're not looking, it's an "assholish" thing to not play monopoly with him anymore?


It's an 'assholish' thing to remove friends from an activity so you can enjoy it when the whole point of having the activity in the first place was to spend time with your friends.



But I'm sorry you feel insulted. I probably singled you out unfairly as this whole thread has been full of people making what I feel are unnecessarily snide responses to a fairly reasonable question.

Maybe you should read the things I say, next time, and not the things you want to argue against? You literally talked over me and what I had to say by conflating me with BrokenChord's joke. You've been a jerk to me entirely unfairly.

I didn't attack you or anyone else. You're behaving like a troll. Kindly sod off and mind your own business if you don't like what people have to say. It's not your job to police people's opinions.

EDIT:


Which I think was clarified as a language mistake, what is considered rude varies drastically from culture to culture. So what may have been intended one way was received another.

To add on to this person's point, YES. I'll clarify that I was raised in Japan. The mere notion of excluding an acquaintance out of personal preference isn't just rude, it's seen as arrogant. I'm not in charge of my group of friends. I'm not the boss or the king of what we do or how we should do it. The sort of behavior Airk or Talos is expecting me to have is culturally equivalent to bullying a person. We value swallowing the individual's preferences for the sake of the group, and if the group doesn't speak up in consensus, nothing can/should be done about the issue politely.

dps
2014-03-13, 12:15 AM
Wait. So if someone enjoys playing monopoly by stealing money from other players when they're not looking, it's an "assholish" thing to not play monopoly with him anymore?

It is NOT a "bait and switch" to say "You're not playing the same game as everyone else, please go home?"


Dang big difference between outright cheating and preferring a different style of play.

mephnick
2014-03-16, 02:49 PM
Try living outside of a major centre, or have most of your geeky friends move away. I put up with the group I can manage to scrounge up or I don't play at all. Ever. For the rest of my life.

Not everyone has the luxury of going through some city roster and cherry-picking the best people you can find.

Jay R
2014-03-16, 05:21 PM
Wait. So if someone enjoys playing monopoly by stealing money from other players when they're not looking, it's an "assholish" thing to not play monopoly with him anymore?

If you had used this example from the start, we'd have agreed with you. If somebody is cheating at D&D, yes, I would ask him to leave the table. Absolutely.

But the original question was about people playing by the rules, but enjoying different aspects of the game at different levels of intensity than you do. That's not stealing or cheating.


It is NOT a "bait and switch" to say "You're not playing the same game as everyone else, please go home?"

Airk, you started with the assumption that most people want to play exactly like you do. Many of us question this assumption. If it were true, the problem would come up much less often than it does.


I REJECT your assertion that's somehow inappropriate to not play games with people who don't enjoy those games the way you do, especially when the conflict of enjoyment causes less enjoyment for everyone.

Oh, I agree with you to some extent. I believe the people who like getting along with others even when there are differences in play style should choose not to play with people who want to force everyone to play in the same style.


... this whole thread has been full of people making what I feel are unnecessarily snide responses to a fairly reasonable question.

They aren't snide responses. They are emotional reactions inspired by your initial emotional reaction. Terms like "mary sue's, munchkins, powergamers, rule lawyers, and professional PIA's" are not reasonable, but emotional. Nothing wrong with that, but your emotional response breeds other emotional reactions.

That's fine, and maybe we should all recognize that we sometimes get a little too emotional.

So at my table, I try to tone down the power gamer, or level the big guns at him. I prepare character sheets for the two friends who like playing but don't want to get too involved in the rules minutiae, work out character-driven plots for the deepest role-player, argue rules carefully with the guy who tries to use them to his advantage, and try to give the guy who likes PvP a constant in-character reason to support the party.

And yes, if somebody cheated, I would kick him out. And I would never characterize the cheater as similar to a power gamer, rules lawyer, or anybody else who is playing the game by the rules.