play or not to play

[Talos]

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.]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

[erikun]

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]

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]

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.

[Airk]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

The badwrongfun is strong with this one.

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]

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]

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]

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?

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

[Airk]

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]

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]

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.