Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Aerostoth 11-19-07, 11:43 PM	I have a huge amount of stuff for my players to do, but it just takes too long. Can anyone help?
johnkretzer 11-20-07, 12:19 AM	I have a huge amount of stuff for my players to do, but it just takes too long. Can anyone help? Need more infomation...though my instant suggestion would to run more games.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 12:24 AM	We keep getting stuck in arguements, and came up with this: D&D Rules, Argument, Punishment, and Conduct Outlines To quickly and easily solve player to player or player to DM conflicts, the following rules of conduct: To Present an Argument: In the case of an argument, the plaintiff states he has a case. Game play is paused. Cases following the following rules: I. Only two minutes of player argument are allowed per argumentative case. II. DM’s ruling is final in first case. If the plaintiff wants another chance, he can appeal his argument to a two member board of judges. The second judge must agree to hear case, or else appeal is void. III. If after another two minute presentation the ruling of the judges is different than in the first case, the new ruling is supreme. If the judges disagree, a third party is brought in as a tiebreaker. IV. No player can argue as his own third party. V. If there is no third party, DM’s vote counts for 1 and 1/100 vote while second judge counts for 99/100 vote. VI. No argument can be presented more than once. If a player has received a ruling but continues to argue, DM punishment is available, after at least one clear warning. VII. Each player is allowed three appealed cases and five cases per hour. VIII. If a player succeeds in proving another player guilty of a personal wrong (Stealing money, reading private information from a sheet, ect.), the DM decides a fair result. Forced giving of items or player punishment is allowed. To Fairly Punish Players: In the case of a DM finding player punishment necessary, he assigns a penalty that abides to the following rules: I. If a player reads a campaign book or learns information otherwise that is directly related to immediate or future game play, DM may, to his discretion, privately or publicly, punish a player character. II. If a player thinks the punishment too extreme, he can immediately present it to the appeal court. The case must be heard, and if the player has already expired their three appeals, it counts for the next hour’s appeals. III. Winning the appealed case can lessen the penalty, but not remove it. The new punishment must be approved by both the DM and the second judge. IV. Level loss or permanent score reduction is not allowed. Temporary reduction, lasting up to one session maximum, cannot cause a score to become zero. Amendments: I. From Punishments, Section 1: The DM will list all books considered acceptable for players to read, but can decide a section contains DM material and forbid players from reading it. A player found reading forbidden material immediately loses access to the book for 1 hour. All books and any restricted sections are listed below: i. Champions of Ruin, Pages 40-44, 113-end ii. Champions of Valor, Pages 60-73, 142-158 iii. CityScape, Pages 109-end iv. Completes: A. Arcane, Pages 137-end B. Devine, Pages 91-107 C. Psionic, Pages 105-139, 157-end D. Scoundrel, Pages 121-end v. Dragon Magic, Pages 92-end vi. Drow of the Under Dark, 95-215 vii. DungeonScape, Pages 39-42, 91-141, 153-end viii. Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, Pages 271-316 ix. Liberis Mortis, Pages 33-41, 53-59, 75-end x. Lords of Madness, Pages 26-37, 52-61, 77-89, 101-107, 115- 121, 130-173 xi. Lost Empires of Faerun, Pages 59-60, 70-83, 111-113, 123-125, 134-136, 146-151, 151-end xii. Magic Item Compendium, DM permission required. xiii. Magic of Faerun, Pages 136-190 xiv. Magic of Incarnum, Pages 52-95, 108-115,162-212 xv. Planar Handbook, Pages 78-85,107-135,138-end xvi. Player’s Handbook 1, All xvii. Player’s Handbook 2, Pages 199-206 xviii. Player’s Guide to Faerun, Pages 119-127, 166-172 xix. Power of Faerun, Pages 115-130, 154-end xx. Psionic Handbook, Pages 157-219 xxi. Races of Destiny, Pages 171-end xxii. Races of Faerun, Pages 170-178 xxiii. Races of the Wild, Pages 170-173, 177-end xxiv. Sandstorm, Pages 54-65, 130-end xxv. Serpent Kingdoms, Pages 136-144, 151-155, 168-186 xxvi. Shining South, Pages 52-94, 181-end xxvii. Spell Compendium, All xxviii. Stormrack, Pages 128-end xxix. Tome of Magic, Pages 76-109, 154-191, 262-end xxx. Unapproachable East, Pages 54-95 xxxi. Under Dark, Pages 64-99, 113-122, 184-end xxxii. Water Deep, Pages 112-144 Player/DM Rights 1) Players have the right to a fair trial, and can ask the DM to remove a judge from the board of they are at all biased. 2) Players have a right to use any items, races, or classes found in their own books, unless the DM has previously decided that items from that book, a race from that book, or a class from that book, cannot be used. 3) DM has the power to omit the use of any class or race from any book, previous to the campaign beginning. He can also omit the use of a book, previous to the campaign beginning. If the DM fails to declare a class restricted until after a player has begun using it, the DM must then convince the board of judges that it should be restricted. The player then immediately creates a new character of the same function. (Arcane, Divine, specialist, tank, ect.) 4) DM reserves the right to instantly modify a player character’s personality or alignment if he finds it disruptive to game play. (Use Player Handbook 2 Pg 129.) 5) Players have a right to participation. Players cannot be excluded from game play against their will. 6) Players have a right to standard items. The cost, weight, or other statistics of an item must be the same for all characters. 7) Players cannot be punished for disruption unless they have received at least one warning within that half hour. 8) Players are allowed at least one player book at any time, and are always allowed a Player’s Handbook. If the book is distracting the player, it can be confiscated for up to half an hour. Multiple offences can deny a player this right. (DM’s discretion.) 9) All looted money must be split evenly, unless the DM specifies otherwise. Borrowed money cannot accumulate interest. In the case of a dispute over a weapon or item, the DM can designate the recipient, as long as the other player receives some kind of compensation. If the player argues, the case can be brought before the appeal court. 10) DMs cannot give a monster bonuses as a punishment, under any circumstance. 11) Weapons and Items cannot disappear as punishment, though inability to wield a certain weapon can be. 12) Unsportsmanlike conduct, determined by the DM, can be punished. 13) At any point before game play begins, the DM can alter a character or their items. 14) DMs can complain about a character to the board, but the defendant takes the DMs position on the board. 15) All characters and their items must be approved by the DM before game play begins. Sry for the long info (i don't know how to make show/hide button).
johnkretzer 11-20-07, 12:54 AM	Wow....just wow. Though I only really need one rules to stop a rules lawyer... which is "during the game the DMs ruling is final, after the game you are more then welcomed to discuss it with the DM. The only exception is a character's death due to a ruling." I also never had to punish a player for the actions above. But I give you full credit for coming up strong rules for table manners. Um...if arguements break out that much I would suggest start getting rid of the people who argue the most.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 01:18 AM	This was actually not my idea, but one of my players. He is my 2nd most disruptive player, and not my rules lawyer (he's my number 1). Our entire system that we play D&D is changing, and we still need to try this. By the way, the player that made this tried to model it after the Constitution (and his IQ is in 150s so no superise to me that he did that good), and he wanted it foolproof so the whole group spent 4 hours on this. P.S. he also wanted to post this on the internet, so he got his wish.
Lord Karsus 11-20-07, 12:58 PM	Wow....just wow. Though I only really need one rules to stop a rules lawyer... -Agreed. Well, he's my thoughts on all of this: 1) This isn't a democracy. This is Dungeons & Dragons- it's a dictatorship. As the DM, everything you say is final, and players do not have the ability to influence things, unless you, the DM, agree, and change your opinion. But, even in this case, it is you, the DM, making the final ruling. 2) Discuss things that don't immediatley impact the game before/after/some other time. If your players are taking up too much gaming time arguing that items from the Magic Item Compendium should be allowed, tell 'em to bring it up before or after the game, or at some other point.
Stigger 11-20-07, 01:05 PM	Personally, I'd have crunched those rules up and stuffed it down his throat... keeping my fist lodged in until he stopped struggling...
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 01:16 PM	-Agreed. Well, he's my thoughts on all of this: 1) This isn't a democracy. This is Dungeons & Dragons- it's a dictatorship. As the DM, everything you say is final, and players do not have the ability to influence things, unless you, the DM, agree, and change your opinion. But, even in this case, it is you, the DM, making the final ruling. Yeah, well my players had a big arguement that the players should be able to put the DM in check, so I figured, "what the heck". I might as well play along. My players are constantly defying what I say left and right, so I eventually get really strict, and then we get into an arguement about it. If they agree to this, than I can hold them to it, and they can't complain. I agree with you, but in my group it just doesn't work. 2) Discuss things that don't immediatley impact the game before/after/some other time. If your players are taking up too much gaming time arguing that items from the Magic Item Compendium should be allowed, tell 'em to bring it up before or after the game, or at some other point. I tried, but they just argue the point that "it effects gameplay, so we should get it done all before we play. By the way, do you play with the Magic Item Compendium, because all the items are distorted, and cheaper.
Lord Karsus 11-20-07, 01:53 PM	Yeah, well my players had a big arguement that the players should be able to put the DM in check, so I figured, "what the heck". I might as well play along. My players are constantly defying what I say left and right, so I eventually get really strict, and then we get into an arguement about it. If they agree to this, than I can hold them to it, and they can't complain. I agree with you, but in my group it just doesn't work. -Well, there's your problem. England signed the Magna Carta, and look where that got her, in respect to the monarchy! :P I tried, but they just argue the point that "it effects gameplay, so we should get it done all before we play. -Well, as the DM, your word is supposed to be final, and binding. However, you did sign away a great deal of your power. ;) -Well, if they know about "it" ahead of time, discuss "it" with them ahead of time. For example, if the player knows he is going to have a problem with the way he wants to use a magic item, have him talk to you anytime before right before the game. If he doesn't, you should simply tell him something along the lines of, "Too bad. I told you to talk to me before...blah blah blah." -By doing it anytime before right before the game, takes away time from playing the game. By the way, do you play with the Magic Item Compendium, because all the items are distorted, and cheaper. -I don't have that book, so obviously, I don't play using it. However, I plan on getting it in the future, when 3e is no longer produced, and bookstores want to make room on their shelves.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 02:00 PM	-However, you did sign away a great deal of your power. ;) Actually, I didn't sign it yet. I'll alter it so only the players are effected. Thanks for the help. If you have any other suggestions, please post. I'd also like your help (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14383584#post14383584)h ere if you could.
Lord Karsus 11-20-07, 02:11 PM	Actually, I didn't sign it yet. -Well, I wouldn't. I'd tell them that I'd keep an open mind when they say/request things, but in the end, as the DM, it's my call.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 02:14 PM	k thnks
Owlperson2007 11-20-07, 06:43 PM	A very effective way of reading the riot act. My DM's job back in the 70s was simpler and the rules just two: 1. No drinking anything stronger than beer (after I spilt a bottle of whisky across his notes - we were all nearly forty, by the way, we weren't kids; had it been out in 1964 I'd still have been interested though). 2. No poking Owlperson's character's eyes out (after the fourth time someone used me as practice for an impromptu reading of King Lear and Cornwall's attack on Gloucester - "out, vile jelly"). We didn't tend to discuss off-topic or non-game matters except to ask me what the latest Steeleye stories were - and for those of you who know who I am, you'll understand that I can't give you Steeleye's real name because even in 1979 when neither of us were MPs we were still involved in the same round of Prime Minister's Question Time we ultimately gave up in 2005 leaving the result a draw. @Aerostoth - that is a very in-depth code of conduct/rules. And yet you are still having trouble...let me see what I can suggest given a reading of my Magic(k) cards for you. What you can't prevent - Enigma Eidolon - I think you are dealing with people who can't take a "no" as "no" and have to work round their continued disregard for a player-DM relationship where some information has to be withheld from players so their characters can't be seen to have knowledge beyond their immediate ken. This situation keeps popping up so you have to find a way of getting players to make sure they distinguish between in-game knowledge and out-of-game knowledge given that they obviously insist on reading books that, to be fair, some of them own anyway and use to give their characters a bit more "intuition" than is fair. You can't take away their property and stop them from reading their copies of DM-only material. Given the length of the list I suggest you continually ask them - is that what your character would really know - until they get the hint. What you can prevent - Knight Errant - someone from getting too big for their boots and taking over from you. I suspect this is the rules lawyer here, and you need to put him in his place because in my experience both in-game and out, lawyers (and I am one by profession) use their superior knowledge of the system to wangle privileges and favours and maintain an edge over those without special knowledge. Your knight-errant is using this extra knowledge to get ahead of the others and spoil their fun; he is also roll-playing (we had that distinction in our day too) and not entering into the spirit of things. What you could do is make the game less dependent on combat and skills and dice checks and do it a bit more freeform as if you are writing a play or starring in a film, so that someone can't abuse the system and give himself extra stats to give him the edge and ruin your games. What you can't change - Dash Hopes - you can't really change your players' personalities and you have to live with the group as it is - you can't Dash their Hopes by kicking them out or imposing more than the odd sanction on them. What I suggest you do now is to throw a spanner into the works and make up a situation in the game where something completely unexpectedly happens to the world which is not in any of the printed material that they have access to. Reading the forums, it is evident to me that many DMs just use printed books without making any effort to add or subtract to them. In my day - I never DMed, as a lawyer and city councillor with a young family I was pushing it with my wife just by playing one evening a week - we didn't have printed worlds to go by and really had to invent our own, removing the problem you have with people having access to the information you need kept secret. Make it up more. Dash their Hopes by inventing something of your own that doesn't happen in the books they own and thus taking the information back into your own hands where it belongs. What you can change - Spike Feeder - Provide more juicy meat for them to hold their attention. Again it includes the above, because to hold their attention you need to throw something in that shakes them up and gets them back into the subordinate position you need them to be in vis-a-vis the information they as players have. Giving them a bigger slice of the apple (?!) here would make sure they don't lose interest and get distracted. Because we were working without source material available at the hobby shops where we bought our players' handbooks (and even they were just bits of photocopied paper stapled together, or they were in 1974; by 1979 AD&D was well on the way but so was my parliamentary career and the real Dungeon and Dragons awaited me!), we enjoyed sessions more from first principles - what would he throw at us tonight? Getting stuck in will help keep them onside and on-message and the extra work will be worth it. What is not visible here - Thallid Shell-Dweller - perhaps you are breeding resentment yourself by imposing such a lengthy code of conduct on people. People are likely to become defensive and then hostile if you impose such a detailed agreement on them without any sign that you are moving towards them in a compromise and bargain. Merely saying you will not kick them out of the group is not enough to keep them positive in your favour and the creeping tentacles of this ...thing (what happened to elves, goblins and orcs?!...I suppose a lot of us early gamers must be at the stage of saying ..."in my day mutant fungi didn't go creeping across...") suggest the situation is developing in a slightly antagonistic way despite the rules. You should try and keep them defending and not attacking, but keeping their attention is what you need to cure at least the symptoms of the disease here, that is, preventing them knowing what's coming up and thus letting them anticipate the enemies they'll face by choosing the "right" skills to deal with them. They are still blinkered enough - the shell looks like a falcon's hood - not to realise what is going on, so by cutting them off at the pass and substituting, say, a vampire for the werewolf they are about to deal with in the published version of the adventure might liven things up. What is visible here - Izzet Chronarch - as I suspected you have someone here who is trying to get every inch of the game to go in his favour by stealing a glance at information his character wouldn't know and feeding it to him after hours - a bit like someone who fills in his crossword from the next day's answers. In this case I would definitely start changing the game to stop this - making it less dependent on dice rolls than on good thinking, or changing the adventure or merging one with another or even making your own up - just to stop players becoming bored with the game and therefore just messing about and not enjoying it as much as you all think you do. What is false - Skulking Knight - the Knight Errant's malicious alter-ego. He's not bad, he's just "been there, seen that, read the book, now I'm playing the game". The rules lawyer is not out to wreck the game, he's either giving you conscious hints that he is bored by always doing published adventures and never seeing your inner imagination at work, or he's subconsciously distracted by other things and is working out his frustrations through trying to be the "best" at this game because he can't be "best" at something else. The best way to deal with the former is to come up with something that they can't know by reading any published books; the latter is always dealt with by making sure the "skulking knight" doesn't always get his way and is not able to be "best" at this, or at the very least understands that D&D is not a competitive game. I much prefer this to Magic (although I enjoy Magic because my fiancee taught me to play and I can recognise a lot of my friends/enemies (look very closely at the face on that one)/myself (and that one)/political factions even in some of the cards, I much prefer the collaborative efforts of D&D to promote people working together rather than at cross-purposes) because of the noncompetitive nature of four or five people round a table drinking and having a laugh together, so your friend should not be treated as someone trying to break the game up, rather as someone bored out of his skull and needing something to stimulate and drive him forward. I suspect the other players feel somewhat the same but aren't as subconsciously needful of an outlet for competitive feelings like this guy. What is true - Snow-covered Mountain - I can see you have reached rather an impasse and although the volcano is still frozen over, something might give in the near future unless you keep the temperature from rising significantly. I don't believe in climate change when it comes to the real world but I can acknowledge that these things are cyclical; similarly games go through periods and moods and trying to move it on to the next level is often difficult (just ask a politician how to regain poll position after a bad speech or three :(:(:weep:). You are the pteranodon at the top (I assume it's a dinosaur though Louise, as usual, is telling me it's a Frost Raptor or something equally bizarre and alien to this old-fashioned wolperson who can cope with Rocs and Owls but not ...things like that) - trying to fly over the canyon but wary of falling in. Give it a shot and let your imagination take flight; don't fight rules with rules but break the ice by giving this guy something to really chew on.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 06:51 PM	Actually, we made those rules 3 days ago and hadn't had a session since. Thanks for the advise though.
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 07:02 PM	I've tried using information that I make up, and instead, he complains about nothing that I make up is fair, because he doesn't know anything about it. He won't accept the fact that he's the player, and should not have DM information. What should I do?
DM_Shonuff 11-20-07, 07:14 PM	Then you give him a choice.(my esteemed colleage, Karsus has previously stated..among others): Option A. Shut up, sit down, play the game that is YOUR (Aerostoth) world, and accept the rulings as is. Option B. Take over Dming and allow him to "show you" how his rules would work. Don't purposely undermine him, you might find that, from the other side of the screen, you see something you didn't from the DM side. Option C. ...leave. This is a game, when your game list of rules overshadows the game's own bought and printed rulebooks but a few dozen pages...your group has a problem. If he has access to the Dm guide, let him read it. Show him that your world=your rules. Do NOT LET ANYONE stop your game to argue (unless it's over a wrongful death). Any and all questions and comments should be dealt with AFTER the game. They don't like that one rule? see ya. *wave bye to them*
Stigger 11-20-07, 07:18 PM	Again, my own personal solution would be the cocked back arm, followed by backhand to mouth of said player... followed by a shove out the door with my booted foot, which then reminds me to open said door before attempting to kick him out of it after I hear the impact of his rapidly crumpling body... ;) :D
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 07:20 PM	ok. I'll try that. thanks.
Stigger 11-20-07, 07:22 PM	Hopefully that wasn't in response to my post... :blink:
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 07:26 PM	:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: no, it was to DM Shonuff's.
Stigger 11-20-07, 07:28 PM	Good, glad to hear that... didn't want lawyers banging on my door anytime soon. :D
Aerostoth 11-20-07, 07:31 PM	yeah.
Lord Karsus 11-20-07, 07:56 PM	Hopefully that wasn't in response to my post... :blink: -Heh.
johnkretzer 11-21-07, 12:07 AM	Then you give him a choice.(my esteemed colleage, Karsus has previously stated..among others): Option A. Shut up, sit down, play the game that is YOUR (Aerostoth) world, and accept the rulings as is. Option B. Take over Dming and allow him to "show you" how his rules would work. Don't purposely undermine him, you might find that, from the other side of the screen, you see something you didn't from the DM side. Option C. ...leave. This is a game, when your game list of rules overshadows the game's own bought and printed rulebooks but a few dozen pages...your group has a problem. If he has access to the Dm guide, let him read it. Show him that your world=your rules. Do NOT LET ANYONE stop your game to argue (unless it's over a wrongful death). Any and all questions and comments should be dealt with AFTER the game. They don't like that one rule? see ya. *wave bye to them* I agree...I think I made that earlier suggestion, sigh no one ever gives me credit. Though I agree let the other guy who wants to DM have his shot.
DMD 11-21-07, 10:46 AM	Wow. Make a new group, take the people who want to play and leave the people out who want to argue. I just threw somebody out a few months ago, game has been fantastic ever since.
Aerostoth 11-21-07, 11:44 AM	yeah, i want to, but i don't know anyone near me that play DnD besides 11 year-olds.
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 01:15 AM	I just threw somebody out a few months ago, game has been fantastic ever since. -Never done that before. Is it hard? yeah, i want to, but i don't know anyone near me that play DnD besides 11 year-olds. -Hmm...Think about it. You can shape their minds...:plotting:
Aerostoth 11-22-07, 12:24 PM	you do have a point there... :schemes:
LordAiden 11-24-07, 11:52 PM	-Never done that before. Is it hard? -Hmm...Think about it. You can shape their minds...:plotting: If you do this (11 year old players that is), just make sure you leave out the rules described in The Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge. Anyone else remember that book from 2nd Edition? They ever update it?
Aerostoth 11-25-07, 12:12 AM	Hmm... that book rings a bell, but I started playing 2 years ago, so I have no clue what it is. Could you fill me in?
johnkretzer 11-25-07, 12:41 AM	If you do this (11 year old players that is), just make sure you leave out the rules described in The Complete Guide to Unlawful Carnal Knowledge. Anyone else remember that book from 2nd Edition? They ever update it? I never heard of it...though there was a Book of Erotic Fantasies published by a 3rd party company.
Lord Karsus 11-25-07, 12:43 AM	Could you fill me in? -D&D Kama Sutra. In effect.
LordAiden 11-25-07, 12:48 AM	Well, it introduced new proficiencies (2nd edition ruleset.. sort of like skills or feats) which were entirely oriented towards themes of a sexual nature. You could have a character skilled in seduction, sex, etc. It also gave rules for attraction, inter-species mating, basic guidelines for handling mixed breeds of different races, what the gestation time was, and in some cases (for extreme pairings) I seem to remember a Save vs. Death or some such to survive the birthing process. There was also information on STDs and methods of curing them, and even some new spells. I don't have the old book memorized, and I can't seem to track it down, but it was entertaining, and some stuff actually made it into a campaign here and there (though I never really implemented the entire ruleset). Clerics of Sharess benefit from some of the abilities if implemented properly... and some of the even had combat effectiveness, I remember one was something along the lines of a character so attractive that opponents suffered penalties when attacking them directly (this only affected enemies of appropriate "sexual alignment"). Anyway, it was a very entertaining, and often quite funny, optional ruleset.
LordAiden 11-25-07, 12:50 AM	I never heard of it...though there was a Book of Erotic Fantasies published by a 3rd party company. I'm quite sure on the name of this one, however it is possible that this was a 3rd party development. However it fit rather seemlessly with the rules.
johnkretzer 11-25-07, 01:14 AM	I'm quite sure on the name of this one, however it is possible that this was a 3rd party development. However it fit rather seemlessly with the rules. I actualy want to see it...the 3rd edition wasn't very good...you know who published it? Send me a PM
Stigger 11-25-07, 11:51 AM	Think White Wolf had something to do with it, at least its later printings. Should be able to find it on Amazon or Borders though if you want to look it up.
Aerostoth 01-22-08, 09:55 AM	I just researched it: Book of Erotic Fantasy was a Valar project.
DMD 01-22-08, 11:16 AM	Yeah I have the book of erotic fantasy. Too much to use unless you have a ton of time to integrate it into the gaming rules. I just bought it for the novelty, my fiance' thought it was funny. Kord Karsus. No it is not too hard to throw people out. I have done it numerous times in the past. I have also had people quit too. Generally it depends on how much you value the friendship and whether the person can understand your rationale for asking them to leave. If they are mature enough it is not a big deal, if they are not they hold a grudge and it strains or ends the friendship. Bottom line is this game is supposed to be fun. Once it ceases to be fun there is no point to continuing to play and if one person is ruining a game I will not hesitate to give them the axe.
Lord Karsus 01-22-08, 11:47 AM	Kord Karsus. No it is not too hard to throw people out. I have done it numerous times in the past. I have also had people quit too. -I've had people quit on me too, and **** up the campaign, in the process. But, I made the most of it. I turned their characters into BBEGs. When life gives you lemons, make lemonade.
18DELTA 01-22-08, 01:13 PM	Again, my own personal solution would be the cocked back arm, followed by backhand to mouth of said player... followed by a shove out the door with my booted foot, which then reminds me to open said door before attempting to kick him out of it after I hear the impact of his rapidly crumpling body... ;) :D -Also remind said player why the DMG has 4 corners, when you bash him in the temple with said corner of DMG!!!;) :P :D :cool: :D LORD DIRTY DELTA:teach: :evillaugh :cloud9:
Aerostoth 01-28-08, 12:13 AM	lol :cheer: :cheer: Another problem just came up in my group: My player that always ends up playing the specialist just had a sorcerer he was playing in the "Expidition to the Demonweb Pits" killed by a swarm of ratatosks and Gryfalcon (he tried to mug Gryfalcon, and ended up attacking him). This was the first character death in the whole group. We've been playing for a while, just the players have always survived (they just make really good characters). His death is causing lots of arguements to escalate, the top one being that 1 of my players doesn't want to kill everything in their path, and everyone else does, so everyone else is planning on attacking that 1 player. Any ideas on how to stop it all?
Lord Karsus 01-28-08, 12:50 AM	His death is causing lots of arguements to escalate, the top one being that 1 of my players doesn't want to kill everything in their path, and everyone else does, so everyone else is planning on attacking that 1 player. Any ideas on how to stop it all? -You have a few options: 1) Allow the players to attack that character, and when they invariably win (as it's a bunch of guys against one guy), have them deal with the extremely negative consequences (EXP penalties, no treasure, have the slain character come back to haunt them, etc.) 2) Inform that player who doesn't want to kill everything of what the other party members are planning, and politely ask him to maybe bend a little more, to eliminate all of the friction. 3) Inform the players who want to kill everything, and politely ask them to maybe bend a little more, to eliminate all of the friction. 4) Prevent the other characters from wanting to attacking the other character, by causing him to have some kind of ability/item that is invaluable, that only he/she can use (Of course, consult that player before doing anything). 5) Utilize more creatures that are undoubtly evil (Demons, Devils, etc.), as to eliminate the moral quandries of killing: "Are all Orcs really evil?". -I think that, perhaps, using a little of all five methods works. Worse comes to worse, tell them all that they are acting like *******s, and just play the damn game!
DMD 01-28-08, 05:46 PM	Is your group Evil? If they are not and kill that player simply to remove an impediment to their own bloodlust they are at least becoming borderline evil. Alignment changes all around I would say, hopefully effecting their class abilities. If they are evil then there is not much you can do.
Aerostoth 02-02-08, 11:47 AM	Unfortunately, changing their alignment to evil will do nothing. The player that doesn't kill everything tries to be good, the sorcerer tries to be evil, and the barbarian/fighter wants to be neutral (whatever will give him power). My last player, my brother, will do whatever is fun at the time, regardless of the consequences. My entire group, save the tank, are extremes. I kicked my brother out a while ago for constantly disrupting the group, and said I won't bring him back in until the next campaign. The group is now searching for a wizard and a cleric (the old sorcerer is going to roll the cleric). My brother wants to play the wizard which is a "Wizard of the Word" (a prestige class that I made to mix wizards and truenamers from "Tome of Magic"). Should I let him?
Lord Karsus 02-02-08, 01:27 PM	Should I let him? -Only on the pretext that he does not disrupt things.
Aerostoth 02-02-08, 02:11 PM	Ok thanks. I'll put him back on a trial basis.
Lord Karsus 02-02-08, 03:24 PM	Ok thanks. I'll put him back on a trial basis. -Tell him to thank me. :)
Aerostoth 02-02-08, 09:37 PM	My group just finished a session: The fighter almost killed the Druid. The fighter brought the Druid down to -1 health in 1 shot. Immediately after that I had 1 Asura, 1 Sword Archon, and 1 Throne Archon drop down from the branches above them (they are on Yggdrasil). The Sword Archon landed behind the Cleric, the Asura landed next to the Druid, and the Throne Archon next to the Fighter, grappling him as to restrict him from attacking. The Cleric then told the Sword Archon that he was going to heal the Druid, and ran over to him. I exused the Archons by saying that they thought that the Druid was a good wielder of Thaas (he already posesses it) and they needed the PCs to stay together to fight Lolth. We ended there on the Cleric's turn. He's torn between casting Cure Critical Wounds to show the Druid mercy when he didn't save the Sorcerer (the Sorcerer was the Cleric's old character), or Inflict Critical Wounds to show revenge. The fighter was talking to the Cleric and sayed "Kill him or I'll kill you." Right before he left he said that he won't play until I take back the encounter. 3 Questions: 1. How should I solve this conflict; Im stumped. 2. Should I have had the Archons drop in (I've only done a few campaigns and still don't know if that was a good choice)? 3. Should I take the encounter back?
Mr. Wilson 02-03-08, 01:30 AM	I've never openly advocated what I'm about to say because of how hard it can be for some people to find others who share their same interests, but in your case, I think I must: You need a new group or to cut out about half the players. Or, just kill everyone, and have them start over. This is one of the most disfunctional groups I've ever read about.
Lord Karsus 02-03-08, 02:00 AM	1. How should I solve this conflict; Im stumped. -Hmm...A diversion could work, to distract the players, and focus their anger of Lolth, who they seem to be enemies with. Perhaps a servant of Lolth has been following everyone around secretly, and attacks while all of this is going on. It'll also serve as a reminder that their enemy is Lolth, and not each other. Perhaps, make it a bit challenging, to remind the players that they'll only be able to ultimatley win if they cooperate and stick together. 2. Should I have had the Archons drop in (I've only done a few campaigns and still don't know if that was a good choice)? -Plot devices are plot devices. You need them sometimes. In this case, I don't think it was such a bad move. And, actually, they can help with this situation. They are LG, right? No LG creature would stand for someone blatently murdering someone else right in front of them. Perhaps have the leader of the Archons say that it has read the mind of the character who wants to kill the other character, and that that individual is under the Archons protection. Anyone who wants to hurt him needs to go through it, first. 3. Should I take the encounter back? -No. You are the DM. You say what goes and what doesn't go, not the players. If a player gets uppity about that fact, suggest to him that, at some point, if he wants to control things, he/she should DM a campaign.
Priamon 02-03-08, 04:34 AM	My group just finished a session: The fighter almost killed the Druid. The fighter brought the Druid down to -1 health in 1 shot. Immediately after that I had 1 Asura, 1 Sword Archon, and 1 Throne Archon drop down from the branches above them (they are on Yggdrasil). The Sword Archon landed behind the Cleric, the Asura landed next to the Druid, and the Throne Archon next to the Fighter, grappling him as to restrict him from attacking. The Cleric then told the Sword Archon that he was going to heal the Druid, and ran over to him. I exused the Archons by saying that they thought that the Druid was a good wielder of Thaas (he already posesses it) and they needed the PCs to stay together to fight Lolth. We ended there on the Cleric's turn. He's torn between casting Cure Critical Wounds to show the Druid mercy when he didn't save the Sorcerer (the Sorcerer was the Cleric's old character), or Inflict Critical Wounds to show revenge. The fighter was talking to the Cleric and sayed "Kill him or I'll kill you." Right before he left he said that he won't play until I take back the encounter. 3 Questions: 1. How should I solve this conflict; Im stumped. 2. Should I have had the Archons drop in (I've only done a few campaigns and still don't know if that was a good choice)? 3. Should I take the encounter back? This is really an easy fix, however probably pretty painfull to do. Go to the local newspaper company and post an add for new players. Your group just doesn't sound like it works. People have to want to play the game more than cause problems and it sounds like they want to cause problems more than play the game.
Lord Karsus 02-03-08, 12:05 PM	People have to want to play the game more than cause problems and it sounds like they want to cause problems more than play the game. -Is that really true?
Aerostoth 02-03-08, 02:56 PM	I think so.
Lord Karsus 02-04-08, 12:14 AM	-Ouch. I consider myself lucky, then, even though I don't like the way most of the people I game with's style.
Priamon 02-04-08, 12:29 AM	-Ouch. I consider myself lucky, then, even though I don't like the way most of the people I game with's style. Mmm. I actually don't like the style most of my group uses to play the game. But I would rather they play with there style and at least we can all enjoy ourselves than cause problems. Thats why I usually just let them do what they're going to do and do what I'm going to do. It's also helpful to the game situationally. If the DM overestimated the groups capability in a combat situation for instance and we have a metagamer that just trys to be combat monster, then he can usually save the game. Other people just like to roleplay..... like OVER roleplay situations. They provide good times for drink runs and snack breaks for the rest of us and on occasion can be very entertaining. Rules lawyers keep everyone in check as long as we can keep him in check. etc etc etc. But despite our differences in play styles, We're all there simply to play the game. If it was otherwise we wouldn't ever get anything done and our time would be better spent.. like... shaving the dog.
Aerostoth 02-04-08, 07:45 PM	I got great news. My rules lawyer (the current cleric) might leave the group if he continues disruping the group: everyone but him agrees with me. My brother will be in as long as he stays serious, and my druid's brother will join if we move faster (which will happen if my rules lawyer leaves). We already have someone who's favorite role is tank (our tank), someone who's favorite role is divine (our druid), my brother loves arcane, and our druid's brother loves specialist. Our group is going to be great as soon as the rules lawyer leaves. 2 Questions: 1. How do I kindly tell the rules lawyer that he will be out of the campaigns? (He's one of my closest friends even though we met last year, and he is a DM for me sometimes also) 2. How can I keep my younger brother to stay serious? (he has a problem with me having "unwavering power" over his character and constantly gets destracted)
Lord Karsus 02-04-08, 10:40 PM	1. How do I kindly tell the rules lawyer that he will be out of the campaigns? (He's one of my closest friends even though we met last year, and he is a DM for me sometimes also) -Well, you said that he might be leaving. I took that to mean that he is going to leave himself. If you need to tell him to leave...Well, this I have no experience with. Maybe tell him that things aren't working out right now, between him and the group or whatever, and that everyone should give it a little break? 2. How can I keep my younger brother to stay serious? (he has a problem with me having "unwavering power" over his character and constantly gets destracted) -Tell him to pay attention. I have no tolerance for stuff like that. Pay attention, and do what you have to do. Maybe include more 'puzzle-like' things, to keep his mind focused on solving in-game things, rather than...other stuff.
Gunnersmate 02-04-08, 11:21 PM	Just out of curiosity, what is the median age of your group? It sounds to me that the "fun" left your "fun and games" and all your left with is "games". Very wierd stuff to say they least. I would make one of these other people DM or take turns DMing for a while on one session adventures till everyone has an idea what it is like.
DMD 02-05-08, 12:26 PM	You tell him like it is. You are disruptive to the game. It is nothing personal and I hope you do not take it that way. You should be prepared to be licked out of his group though if he is the type of person that takes these things personally. I agree with LK. Tell your brother to pay attention. A DM must be a autocrat, if you are not you might as well wargame so there is no DM/GM and all players have equal say, it will be les stressful that way. ;)
Aerostoth 02-08-08, 05:31 PM	Just out of curiosity, what is the median age of your group? It sounds to me that the "fun" left your "fun and games" and all your left with is "games". Very wierd stuff to say they least. I would make one of these other people DM or take turns DMing for a while on one session adventures till everyone has an idea what it is like. 13. Our group just gets frustrated with puzzles. any other ideas?
Lord Karsus 02-09-08, 12:14 AM	Our group just gets frustrated with puzzles. any other ideas? -Have less difficult puzzles?
Aerostoth 02-09-08, 10:23 AM	Maybe...:thinks:
Lord Karsus 02-09-08, 10:44 AM	-Hey, if it works, why not. Because, puzzles are an intrinsic part of D&D, just like plain ol' fighting is. You need a puzzle or two every now and then, to mix things up when the characters aren't roleplaying. In fact, I'm going to throw a puzzle my character's way, just because it's been a while since they've had one. :cool:
Aerostoth 02-09-08, 04:44 PM	The problem I have with puzzles is I can't figure out how to incorperate them well.
Lord Karsus 02-09-08, 11:31 PM	The problem I have with puzzles is I can't figure out how to incorperate them well. -That's something you have to figure out for yourself. A puzzle on a lock. A puzzle to reroute the flow of water in a dam. Whatever.
Aerostoth 02-10-08, 11:14 AM	ok.
Lord Karsus 02-10-08, 04:33 PM	-If you look online, there are plenty of pregenerated puzzles and riddles all over the place.
DMD 02-11-08, 12:33 PM	If the median age of your group is 13 then the issue with disruptive players is not a surprise. When I was 13 and playing it was the same thing. The DM wanted to be serious and the players simply did not (generally speaking). So maybe another way for you to deal with the issues you face is to change your gaming style and be a little more goofy and have a little more hack and slash. Or find new players. :D Not sure what your financial means are but there are riddle books you can pirchase as well specifically designed for fantasy roleplaying. One company used to have ads in Dragn all the time. Can't remember the name of the company at the moment though.
Aerostoth 02-15-08, 11:29 AM	thanks.
Aerostoth 04-25-08, 12:41 PM	Sorry I haven't been on in a while. Our group has gotten into the Demonweb Pits for the first time. The cleric (my disruptive rules lawyer) has ****** everybody off and has been left for dead. Everybody else is continuing on. With him temporarily gone, it has gone much faster. I am giving him another chance (I have an idea on how to make him behave), and I'm DMing for his character solo. Everybody else has been caught by the drow and are being tortured. None of them can break out (the goliath warblade is chained up with masterwork addamantine enchanted manacles, and he can almost get out). The druid had no idea drows were this good at torture, and is planning on becoming a Blighter. The cleric, on the other hand, has been taken in by some other drow (his bluff is really high) because they think he is here in search of intruders on behalf of Lolth. He is bluffing that he will take the "prisoners" to another facility for further torture. I have decided on a way to make the players stick to "good" alignments: when switching alignments, you take penalties as if you were multiclassing you lose 1 level in this campaign the archons that saved the druid will come after any betrayer it requires an atonement spell to change alignments, and it must be cast by a person of the same diety as you and the same alignment you are changing into The person changing alignments recieves a -1 penalty to everything for 1 month because he/she is thinking if he/she made the right decision People who change alignments suffer ill effects as described in Book of Vile Darkness:devil: With this, nobody in this campaign will change alignments. If anyone has an idea for alignment-changing rules in other campaigns, please post.
Aerostoth 06-01-08, 07:28 PM	Our group has progressed slightly: Rules Lawyer (Cleric) died again unowned character died After the Cleric had made a pact with his god (I don't recall his name, but he's in Frostburn and the god of revenge ) and Lolth. He then went to the PCs who were unconcious and cast Mark of Justice on each of them (if any of them attack him or his allies they are subject to [I]Curse) and tied them all up. He told them all to either follow him or he will kill them. The Warblade agreed because he needed money for a weapon enchant and the claric said he would pay for it. After the Cleric let the Warblade loose, the Warblade used a manuever I came up with and knocked the Cleric out. He then held everyone hostage and told everyone to either sign the contract or die. Only the Cleric did not sign the contract, and the Warblade killed him. My Rules Lawyer is now making a Hellborn (FCII) Pally to replace the Cleric. He figured the whole group would trust him if he was a Pally (which is true). Immediately after the death of the Cleric, the group moved on and found some Palrethee Demons and lava. The demons grabbed the rogue and jumped into the lava, killing the rogue. The rogue's player was my Druid's brother, but he stopped playing this campaign because it was going so slowly. The Druid has been playing the rogue also ever since. The group might move faster than before, but I doubt any huge changes will occur. P.S. For anyone who has ran Expidition to the Demonweb Pits before, my group is still on the first visit to the Demonweb Pits and at the Palrethee Demons; where would be a good place to insert the new Paladin?
Lord Karsus 06-02-08, 01:08 AM	-I hate resorting to things "out of character/out of game", but you can simply say that you want the characters to have Good alignments, and to act like they have Good alignments.
Rabbitacular 06-02-08, 12:42 PM	By the way, the player that made this tried to model it after the Constitution (and his IQ is in 150s so no superise to me that he did that good), and he wanted it foolproof so the whole group spent 4 hours on this. P.S. he also wanted to post this on the internet, so he got his wish. Just because someone has a high IQ doesn't mean they can't have their head way up their own butt. That many rules is overwhelming and punishment for something that is supposed to be fun is just dumb. As a DM, take control. If someone acts up in the game, have something happen to their character. If someone disagrees with your ruling, refer to Rule Zero, which is that the DM makes the final call. If someone wants to argue with you, tell them they can argue after the game, but for the sake of speeding up play, you're going to let your ruling ride. Freakin simple.
Aerostoth 06-04-08, 07:18 PM	Ok. Another big problem I have is I keep getting distracted with the players. It just seems hippocritacal of me to be goofing around with them, and right after that I'm getting mad at them for getting distracted. Although I don't start the distractions, I still get caught up in them all the same. How can I keep myself focused while my players are distracting me?
Lord Karsus 06-04-08, 07:31 PM	-You just...do it, I don't know. Use, "So, anyway..." a lot, to get things back on topic.
Stigger 06-04-08, 07:37 PM	Get an air horn and use it liberally when they start straying from playing...
Aerostoth 06-04-08, 07:42 PM	Get an air horn and use it liberally when they start straying from playing... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Simple but efficient.
Lord Karsus 06-04-08, 08:59 PM	-Yeah, that would work...
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 06-04-08, 09:01 PM	Ok. Another big problem I have is I keep getting distracted with the players. It just seems hippocritacal of me to be goofing around with them, and right after that I'm getting mad at them for getting distracted. Although I don't start the distractions, I still get caught up in them all the same. How can I keep myself focused while my players are distracting me? I wouldn't be too worried about it. Part of the fun of D&D is getting together with friends.
MerrikCale 06-04-08, 10:53 PM	just keep smacking 'em upside the head
anotherSIDEtoIT 11-04-08, 11:53 PM	Well... Regarding Aerostoth and your campaign... You all should hear the other side. i'm the group tank. I wrote the costitution (what a desparate waste). Im the only one who can ever be called neutral. So let me summarize and clarify: From the very beginning of this campaign, our "rules lawyer" (really, aerostoth? honestly?), lets call him Rumblebelly, has been fighting incessantly with our DM. I understand that he has been slowly wearing away at aerostoth's nerves, and I have moments where I'd love to roll my dice and smile and tell him his head is no longer attached, but at the same time Aerostoth is using him as a scapegoat. He is not trying to be so arguementative; its just that he chooses to debate over everything that doesnt go his way. This has made Aerostoths reflex to tell him NO before he can even say a sentence, which only makes things worse. He does slow us down, we need to fix that, but you can't say this is only his fault when your DM calls down angels to protect our druid, and then HELPS ME to kill our cleric(the arguementative one). So all I can say is this has gone on long enough. You can kick rumblebelly out; you can make rules; you can ignore him; but were never going to enjoy D&D unless you sacrifice the friendship or work things out.
Therise 11-05-08, 01:15 AM	Yeah, well my players had a big arguement that the players should be able to put the DM in check, so I figured, "what the heck". I might as well play along. My players are constantly defying what I say left and right, so I eventually get really strict, and then we get into an arguement about it. If they agree to this, than I can hold them to it, and they can't complain. I agree with you, but in my group it just doesn't work. I tried, but they just argue the point that "it effects gameplay, so we should get it done all before we play. By the way, do you play with the Magic Item Compendium, because all the items are distorted, and cheaper. I have only one question: are you having fun? If not, fire all of your argumentative players. DM ruling is final.
DMD 11-05-08, 12:04 PM	I can't believe this is still going on. This thread died 8 months ago. :) If it is that bad, you really as a group need to remove the problem player or perhaps have someone else DM the game.
Aerostoth 11-15-08, 01:14 AM	Well... Regarding Aerostoth and your campaign... You all should hear the other side. i'm the group tank. I wrote the costitution (what a desparate waste). Im the only one who can ever be called neutral. So let me summarize and clarify: From the very beginning of this campaign, our "rules lawyer" (really, aerostoth? honestly?), lets call him Rumblebelly, has been fighting incessantly with our DM. I understand that he has been slowly wearing away at aerostoth's nerves, and I have moments where I'd love to roll my dice and smile and tell him his head is no longer attached, but at the same time Aerostoth is using him as a scapegoat. He is not trying to be so arguementative; its just that he chooses to debate over everything that doesnt go his way. This has made Aerostoths reflex to tell him NO before he can even say a sentence, which only makes things worse. He does slow us down, we need to fix that, but you can't say this is only his fault when your DM calls down angels to protect our druid, and then HELPS ME to kill our cleric(the arguementative one). So all I can say is this has gone on long enough. You can kick rumblebelly out; you can make rules; you can ignore him; but were never going to enjoy D&D unless you sacrifice the friendship or work things out. Glad to see you finally found this thread. :D I've been wanting your opinion on all of this for a while. I stuck with the rules lawyer title because origionally it was fitting, and now that everyone else knows the rules better than he does it doesn't fit I know; I just kept it for consistancy. I do acknowledge that it is becoming a "habit" of saying no to him, and the more he pushes it, the more I'll refuse, but I'm sticking to the rules for consistancy, and not changing it around every time just to stop him from whining whenever things don't go his way. I'm not using him as a scapegoat; the conflicts we have are not all his fault, but I know what to do (for the most part) to stop those situations, but personally I think my share of the problem is a lack of consistancy in some cases (which is ironic, because consistancy is one of the most coveted aspects of a good campaign to me). I'm working on consistancy, and I'll have it down by the time I run another big campaign. What I'm really stumped on is how to solve this without kicking Rumblebelly. I have only one question: are you having fun? If not, fire all of your argumentative players. DM ruling is final. We are having fun, but not when "Rumblebelly" is arguing. I can't believe this is still going on. This thread died 8 months ago. :) If it is that bad, you really as a group need to remove the problem player or perhaps have someone else DM the game. This should have ended a while ago, but all attempts have failed. We ended the Demonweb Pits campaign a while ago (at the start of summer), and "Rumblebelly" had his turn at it, and we began running Expidition to Ravenloft. That turned out to be bad; whenever we had an advantage in a fight, he would overpower the enemies. For example, I was about to deal the finishing blow to an insane wizard, but he suddenly -without using a readed action or anything- pulled out and activated a mysterious scroll that gave him Sanctuary, but with a little twist: there was absolutely NO way to get through it, and the wizard was free to do whatever he wanted without breaking the spell. There were plenty more times when he performed acts of stupidity such as that, and I'm sure that anotherSIDEtoIT will agree with me on that. That campaign got boring fast, so we dropped that (on his toe I might add -if you don't know him, you won't get it-), and now the RP-heavy ex-druid is running a freeform campaign (loosely based in a city) in which runs very smoothly whenever Rumblebelly isn't there. I believe I've come yo a rough conclusion: I need to give Rumblebelly a definitive choice- stop arguing and disrupting the group, or stop playing in my campaigns. In the past though, anotherSIDEtoIT, you have said (or at least Rumblebelly told me that you said) that if Rumblebelly quits or is kicked, you will stop. If you and Rumblebelly stop, the druid will stop also. If that does not happen, then I can go along with giving him a choice to cooperate or leave.