Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Emirikol 09-06-04, 07:55 PM	This is something that I've been mulling over in the past few years..why is it when one player at the table starts ragging on the DM (for whatever immature reason) that the rest of the players just sit there and watch him? I guess this is just a plea for players to start policing their own. I've been DMing for 15 years for the RPGA and just quit for a while up because I was tired of having to play 'DAD' to 35 year old babies..and there seems to be one at every table. Any other DM's or players relate to this, or have I just been unlucky at a lot of tables? jh ..
Sieylianna 09-06-04, 09:22 PM	I guess this is just a plea for players to start policing their own. I've been DMing for 15 years for the RPGA and just quit for a while up because I was tired of having to play 'DAD' to 35 year old babies..and there seems to be one at every table. Any other DM's or players relate to this, or have I just been unlucky at a lot of tables? The problem has become a lot worse with the growth of living campaigns. I know a number of judges who have quit judging RPGA events entirely or who limit their judging to small local cons and/or specific campaigns (such as LD or LF). I've never seen a player sanctioned for disruptive behaviour of any sort and I've seen players argue where the rules are quite clear. It's taking a toll on the judge pool, I had only two "good" judges at Gen Con, out of seven slots played. Ed
Sargh 09-06-04, 11:50 PM	I somewhat agree. I've seen this happen several times. But I also think it's cyclical. I've seen several players degenerate into arguing rules, getting into heated discussion with DM's, etc because their guard was up from playing under a previous judge who pretty much screwed them over from lack of knowledge, biasedness, or a slew of other things. And it often perpetuates as players have a DM run a mod/encounter poorly, and when said player runs the mod, he/she does the same. I hate to see good judges get run off by bad players. But for every instance of this I've seen, I've seen players (often new to the game) get run off by poor judges more. And let's face it, sometimes it's the fault of neither, just a poor mod. For example, I played one recently that was geared towards upsetting the players and did things poorly mechanics-wise. But as a player who's character is on the line playing it, the only outlet is the judge. -Sargh
Emirikol 09-07-04, 12:14 AM	It's not usually the player who knows the rules 'better' than the DM, it's the cheese-weasel who's too darn lazy to actually look up the rule and then just wants to quote it off the top of his head. There's usually a reason why some of these guys are playing RPGA games..they've been kicked out of their home game. Heh :) jh
Emirikol 09-07-04, 12:28 AM	I hate to see good judges get run off by bad players. But for every instance of this I've seen, I've seen players (often new to the game) get run off by poor judges more. That's how I've seen it too. The problem is that the players don't matter (much). There's a nearly endless supply of players in the RPGA. DM's on the other hand are a commodity. Now, if I was a convention coordinator trying to make a buck off the backs of 'volunteer' DM's and paying players, I'd probably just try to squeeze as many players in as possible and hand scenarios to DM's at the last minute (was that a jib-jab?)..then expect players and DM's to get along just great! Yea right ;) Organizers have every right to deny admittance to 'certain' players..but most don't. Players also tend to have the ability to just get run off easier and with less provocation because they have no responsibilities. None. This is getting to the barely cynical side of me, but very few players bring anything to a Living Greyhawk table anymore other than the urgency to get through the module and get the gp/xp at the end. We started out great 4 years ago..but now we're in need of some re-tooling. Perhaps it's the denegration of yet another campaign to high-level. Perhaps it's the lack of reward for good role-playing. Perhaps it's ambivalent staff and Traids. Oh well, it's not like it's not fun..but it could always be better. All of the fixes probably start at the table with DM support (true for any campaign). Since I quit DMing, I've actually been playing. That's right. I wasn't playing much since the campaign started..I just DMed and was on the Triad (URC). It's been interesting to take all of these thoughts to the table and support my DM's and have a good time being at the table with friends and getting into the game. jh ..
Sieylianna 09-07-04, 12:40 PM	That's how I've seen it too. The problem is that the players don't matter (much). There's a nearly endless supply of players in the RPGA. DM's on the other hand are a commodity. Now, if I was a convention coordinator trying to make a buck off the backs of 'volunteer' DM's and paying players, I'd probably just try to squeeze as many players in as possible and hand scenarios to DM's at the last minute (was that a jib-jab?)..then expect players and DM's to get along just great! Yea right ;) Organizers have every right to deny admittance to 'certain' players..but most don't. IMO, this is one of the biggest problems with the way the RPGA has changed over the past few years. They focus their attention on the players and ignore the work which is done by DM's and Authors to give people an opportunity to play. I have close to 40 player rewards cards (half for old membership levels) as player. As a DM, I received three boxes of minis (for my old membership level) and that's been it. I haven't seen anything from the new DM rewards program, but I'm not sure if it has even gotten off the ground. The modules I've written are for campaigns which still pay for them, but that is a distinct minority of the total RPGA modules. Writing a module requires a significant commitment of time and I don't think that is properly recognized. Ed
Emirikol 09-07-04, 03:51 PM	Somebody at the RPGA needs to read "The E-myth" by Michael Gerber. Consistency of the delivery of a commodity is a must. jh
Cardinal Teplin 09-09-04, 10:42 AM	You can get players who really annoy a GM. You can get GMs who really annoy players. I've met some GMs that I would argue rules calls with, despite me knowing its a bad idea, because I know that characters will permentantly die as a result. Similarly, I have lost my temper with a player, which is never a good idea, but in a stressed situation is going to happen sooner or later. The main reason why other players just sit there and watch a disruptive player is because they have far more to lose from annoying him than the GM does. A player on your table who doesn't like his party can wreck an adventure, insulting or killing NPCs, spoiling ambushes, and so on, not to mention ruining role-playing opportunities and spoiling the whole social dynamic. To put the boot on the other foot for a moment, when a player acts to spoil a party's carefully laid plan, most GMs just sit there and watch them, and some actively encourage them. Few would ever overrrule a player's wishes, even if they were spoling the game, or deliberately spoiling the party's chance of success for the sake of a cheap laugh. And what exactly can the player do? His character can't usefully prevent the offender's PC from doing anything he wants to. The player as a person has no particular authority over the offender, and while DMs have a tendancy to assume a table of players are a block entity, the reality is that each individual player is just as much alone as the DM is, particularly at a con. Let's put it another way. Say as a GM, you find one player is fairly annoying, but nothing you can't handle. But one of the other players can't handle it, and starts arguing with him. The game disintigrates into chaos. So... who are you going to throw out? That's right, the two who were arguing. You aren't going to go to all the hassle of keeping the one who was annoying you most, and going through all the accusations of favouritism, now are you? The point is, as a player, you can't act unless you know, as a matter of fact, that the DM agrees with you. Which is why players don't do anything. They simply aren't allowed to. I suspect you have also been unlucky, of course. What you describe is more personal attack than disruptive behaviour. But there is still a category mistake there. The abusive player isn't 'one of their own' any more than you are. Players at a table don't necessarily know eachother particularly at cons.
SteveMND 09-09-04, 11:34 AM	"The main reason why other players just sit there and watch a disruptive player is because they have far more to lose from annoying him than the GM does." I suppose to some degree, but more to the point, it's not the player's responsibility to handle a troublesome player. That's the judge's job, not the player's. A player has no administrative control anyway over other PCs. That said, in most cases where I've ever seen a fellow player get disruptive (and I've been lucky in that it's generally never been more than rules arguing over 'iffy' points), if it starts to get really time-consuming with no end in sight, I'll chime in if I feel the judge's call is correct. If I feel the player's call is correct, I'll say so if I'm asked for my opinion, but even so, I'll mention that while I feel the player is right, it's also the judge's call, and it's ultimately his table.
Samwise 09-09-04, 01:03 PM	I've had players back me as a DM and tell other players to lighten up. I've had players outright tell other players to shut their mouths and let a third player play his character as he sees fit, moments before I was going to have to do the same. So there are players out their willing to stand up for the good of a table. And I've seen players wreck tables. Not through deliberate malice to get back at other people at the table, but through tactics and choices that leave other players hanging at the worst possible time. And I see a lot of these people shunned, with players refusing to sit at a table with them, even if it means not playing that night. And I had one instance of a table degenerate over certs. It was after the shift eliminating them, and it was one of the last times a module with certs was run. I was 5 minutes away from telling everyone that if they didn't resolve the issue reasonably I was going to invalidate the entire table. It was the worst thing I'd ever seen, and I was more than happy I'd never have to deal with again. And as I've said, the first part is for both sides to get over it and play the game. If a player sits at my table and assumes I'm there to hose him over from the beginning, be it with rules intrepretations (which shouldn't be needed in the first place), rules changes (which are of course illegal), or by forcing some bit of outrageousness in a module down their throat (which is out of the DMs hands), then the game is going to be a tedious waste of effort, and I'd much prefer they get up and leave or the event coordinator give me another table to run. Conversely if a DM sits down assuming that a player is cheating, intends to cheat, or has just weaseled his way around the rules and needs a smackdown on general principle, once again it is time for someone to walk, be reassigned, or just plain be turned away. Both sets of attitudes are equally destructive to the game and need to be ended. My advice is to continue to remind everyone that it is a game that requires a cooperative effort from all parties. If you are a player, be prepared to explain how and why you can do something, particularly your more extreme power plays. If you are a DM, be prepared to listen and accept that extreme power plays exist, are legal, and are more common at higher levels. If you are a player, be prepared to show a rule without insulting the DM for not knowing it, and be prepared to see a clarification in the FAQ or errata that you might not have known about. If you are a DM, be prepared to accept that a player might know a particular rule better than you, or that an exception appears in the FAQ or errata that you don't know about. If you are a player, be prepared to work with your fellow players and the DM no matter what, and be prepared to remind other players when they are acting poorly. If you are a DM, be prepared to work with the players no matter what, and be prepared to treat them with twice the consideration you would expect as a player. That way you can be half-successful and the game will still be pleasant. And one last thing. We have a very close group where I play. (Which means run as I don't play LG.) When DMs have questions, we get up and talk to each other. We check with someone else whether a rules interpretation is right, whether a tactic is reasonable, whether something might have changed (particularly with 3.5 DR and the like), or just if we think we are about to brutally slaughter a party and if we might have missed the least little bit in the module that might avoid it. I strongly recommend that to everyone whenever possible. You don't have to DM by committee, but asking for advice or help is a sign of strength of character, not weakness of ability.
oroborous 09-10-04, 11:42 PM	My take on the whole deal is that the RPGA has the General Rules and that they should be enforced with more regularity. I've been at mostly good tables where nothing bad has happened, but those other few have been nightmares. I had to go directly over the head of a judge and report two players who were detracting from the game, because the judge wouldn't do anything about it. As a judge, I've warned a few players, but I've never gone further than that. Most players already police themselves admirably. I fake it every now and then and resist the urge to choke that one player who went off of his Ritalin. When something bad DOES happen judges and players already have outlets. They just need to use them instead of acting out.
honeynuggets 09-11-04, 10:27 PM	The only time I have ever seen players argue with a DM is regarding a reasonably debateable ruling. If I am familiar with the rule I will add my knowledge regardless of who it favors. I feel it is much worse to kill a player with a bad ruling than it is to let a player get away with bending a rule to her favor. LG could go a long way towards easing the animosity created when players and DMs by eliminating the retarded policy of box text overriding official encounter start distance rules. So you have huge lurking monsters that you just happen not to notice until you are 30 feet from them. This is by far the most commonly argued rule leading to player death. The DMG has clear and simple rules for encounter start distances and LG should abide by them.
solbergb 09-25-04, 11:46 PM	Well...LG does abide by the encounter distances. LGCS3.0 says that you run by the letter and spirit of the rules. It is the Judges who place the large monsters at 30' with no chance to spot it, not the authors. Or at least that's the case in the Pale and Core mods I've prepped (approaching 2 dozen now). Most mods say what the environment is, and provide statblocks with spot/listen/move/hide and let the Judge do the rest (since the rest depends on party abilities, this is actually an appropriate approach, if the Judge does his homework). There may be mods out there with box text autosurprise from stupid distances. I just haven't seen any. My sample size is: 1 Year 2 Pale mod 4 year 3 Pale mods 3 Year 3 Nyrond Metaregional mods 2 Year 3 Core mods 4 year 4 Pale mods 4 year 4 Pale minimissions 4 year 4 Core mods Your mileage may vary in other regions. Just don't assume the way it is run for you was the way the mod was written, especially with respect to encounter distances and surprise. I don't know why Judges want to autosurprise parties, but it sure as heck isn't even implied by the mods, beyond text that says "the monsters attack" or "the monsters sneak up on the party" or whatever.
Fruitcake1982 10-02-04, 01:50 PM	As a player and a game master of this wonderful campaign that we play in. I have only a few rules as a judge. The most important is "Do not argue with me at the table, if you want to discuss the ruling when we are finished, that will be acceptable". The only time that I will stop play to discuss a ruling is when it involves character death. Then I will tell my table to take a 5-minute break and have the player show me the rule. Most of the time if the player can make a convincing argument in a civil tone of voice, I will change my ruling. But once I have made a decision it is final and can only be changed by myself or over-ridden by the appeals judge, that we have at all functions, even if informally. The problem is that most players don't realize how many times a judge will adjust a die roll by adding or subtracting a "circumstance bonus" to help the players. So when something bad or tragic happens it is that much more traumatic. One of the other things I have seen is too many players do not know when to run away from an encounter that is overwhelming to them. I have two ways of judging. 1. Low level characters and Entry-level players, where all of my die rolls happen behind a screen. Because we all know at 1st or 2nd level a single critical hit can and most often does kill a character outright. 2. Med to High Level characters and experienced players, Die rolls in the open, no screen, no holds barred. These players are experienced and know the rules (most of the time) and know how the game is played. Therefore they get very few breaks. Most players don't realize how much "work" goes into judging a module, because they don't care. They only want to come in sit down and get their xp/gp and move on. Nor do they have any business judging because they only care to know the rules that apply directly to them and their character. Where on the other hand, the judge has to run know the rules that apply to every NPC and monster that appears in the scenario. But most important of all is when them game gets tense, and the palms are sweaty, I remind them that it is just a game and we are all here to have fun. Thanks for letting me ramble
Arinaad 10-03-04, 12:37 PM	Hi; I have to comment on the post with regards to the judge setting distance for encounters, not the author. I have seen several modules, all writen by the same author, who's name I will not post for reasons of politeness, in which the tiered encounters are simply populated by the same creature advanced to different levels. In one instance the mod flowed as such at APL 8: 1 large spider advanced to Gargantuan. 1 Gorgon advanced to huge. 1 Hound Archon who broke the rules of his own game. the issue is with the Gorgon which in the module wrote basically that the Gorgon charges from behind a building (irregardless of movement, silence, etc) and breathes on the party, which we did not refute. However we did refute the next line which stated specifically that the Gorgon then took the next round smashing the statue, thereby killing the PC outright. We have had many modules like this and thus we have made a core of judges who all slot zero the modules and ensure that the group understands and knows the module and all aplicable rules. As well, if something strange goes on at a con we ALL gather to decide the way that fate would have it. Also, with regards to judges not getting enough support from players, I agree that it is not the player's place to resolve disputes, and that they also have no place to argue rulings with the judge. At the table the judges rule is final, and if there is an issue with a ruling that the players as a whole believe to be unfair it should be taken to the con's appeals judge. That means that the appeals judge makes the call AT THE TABLE, and the players do not go running off to thier friends at the triad when something bad happens. That's my 2 cents. Arinaad