Post/Author/DateTime	Post
skywyze 06-06-07, 03:01 AM	I had a chat with another player the other day, and apparently her sole reason for playing roleplaying games is so she can do what the DM didn't expect. The purpose of this being to force him to improvise, to revise his story over and over and generally make him feel bad or unprepared. I on the other hand, will pick up on subtle queues from any DM and run with them, curious to see what kind of story he had planned, and seeing where it leads. But it does beg the question - how many players play with the express intention of causing work for the DM or otherwise inconveniencing them or the other players? So, do you play with the DM or against them?
Drag0nUL 06-06-07, 03:12 AM	In my gaming group this issue would have to be discussed regarding 2 separate instances: in combat and out of combat. Out of combat I(and the other players) try to roleplay our characters' personality as good as possible. We won't pick on the DM for no particular reason, but we won't also accept a quest he wants if our characters had no in-game reason to be interested in that. In combat however we like to have it as we vs. him(I think is no fun fighting against an opponent who doesn't do his best to defeat you). And we do try to cause as much harm as we can, especially employing surprise tactics(we once prepared and refined a certain move for a couple of weeks with the sole purpose of using it as a surprise against the BBEG; and indeed it turned what was supposed to be a difficult battle into a trivial 2 round slaughter; but the DM tries to do the same to us so nobody gets upset).
polt 06-06-07, 03:21 AM	This topic could basically be called "Are you an idiot or not"? Why on earth would you play against your DM? That's just being a jerk. The DM and the players are all responsible for an enjoyable game. Not only enjoyable for yourself, but for the other players, and the DM. I really have a hard time seeing the fun in trying to screw the DM.
Sterling 06-06-07, 08:56 AM	I've seen too many instances of players trying to cause trouble for the DM, myself. If the DM's being a real jerk, that's one thing, but usually its just some player who thinks he/she knows better and wants to prove they can trash the game. All it really does is prove the player is a moron and ruin what should have been a night of fun for everyone else. I've also seen this backfire spectacularly and hilariously when the DM turns out to be a master at improvisation and does indeed know the rules inside out. I've learned that playing along is far more fun and rewarding.
Majick 06-06-07, 09:12 AM	I had an instance where my players seemed to think they were invincible and that nothing could ever beat them because i was, what, their friend and a DM? It made no sense. I put them in a fight and straight away made it clear that they had NO CHANCE (painfully clear), yet they stuck around anyway, and all got captured (though i should have just let them get killed for their cocky attitudes) Sometimes people just don't wanna listen, and just don't wanna play nice... Sometimes, people act like such... humans... sucks doesn't it? :rolleyes:
Kouk 06-06-07, 09:18 AM	Maybe you should add a third category, "Do you play with the DM, against the DM, or just as your character would act?" Sometimes I act a bit silly and antagonize a bit ("They retreated into the forest with the artifact, and now we have to go get it? Screw that, let's just set the woods on fire and make them come out!") but usually I act as my character and "with" the DM almost equally, depending on how bored everyone is.
Carmine_the_Wolf 06-06-07, 09:23 AM	A player who comes up with an inovative approach to an encounter or roleplays a distinctive and interesting character can challenge the DM to keep things exciting and original; but just going along to a session just to humiliate the DM is pretty pathetic. Apart from sabotaging the running of the game and ruining things for the other players, it shows a basic lack of respect for the guy who put all the work in to get the game off the ground in the first place. I never understand people who get themselves into such situations just to find fault and cause trouble with the creative efforts of others. If that's all this person can come up with to explain why she roleplays, the only image I can summon is one of a very, very sad individual indeed.:rolleyes:
windscar18 06-06-07, 05:20 PM	I think your friend looks upon D&D as a competitive game, as an attempt to show off. By chance, does she have trouble working with teams? If she doesn't have trouble, is it because she's doing it to look for more opportunitites to cause trouble?
skywyze 06-06-07, 05:41 PM	The person in question will work with others, but only as a last resort and only to the very minimum required. I am relieved however, to find the most players don't actively seek to ruin the campaigns they play in.
Pyro_Azer 06-06-07, 06:01 PM	The only time i or someone in my party will screw over the DM is if the DM is being an &$@hole and trying to screw us over.
darkneolink 06-06-07, 06:27 PM	I like to play with my DM we are good friends and we talk about our plans (My plans for my character and his plans in a campaign) so we can have a good time all together If the DM wants to keep the plot hidden (and is his right to do so) I play as my character would act If the DM acts as a(an) ______________(insert your own insult here) then we a) talk to him b) ask him to give the place to someone else in the group we never NEVER act against a DM well just once but we made it clear that it was going to be a comedyc campaign
Hunter Rose 06-06-07, 06:56 PM	I generally play with the DM. If I stick with a group for a while, it's because I enjoy the DM's ability to spin a yarn and he knows how to hold my interest. At that point, he has usually proved himself willing to listen to his players and work with them. The least I can do is trust him enough to follow in the general direction of his lead.
CryoSilver 06-06-07, 07:00 PM	I play D&D to have fun. I find that in almost all cases, no one has more fun than the DM is allowed, so it's in my best interests to appease him. Usually.
AlanBruce 06-06-07, 07:35 PM	I had a player in my group once that told me he would choose feats, spells, and make decisions geared towards disabling the campaign in order to watch me stress it. That kid doesn't play with us anymore. The point is, in the end, everyone must have fun, DM and players alike. It sure is fun when a player comes up with an innovative solution or use for a spell which wasn't even considered before. Going out of your way to disrupt the game by slowing it down with solo missions and general rude nonsense is not. And ultimately, for all those players with a mentality like the one described a few lines above, don't you realize that if the DM wants, in game, he can make your PC's life a veritable hell.. if not a very short one?
Matthias_Kelvine 06-06-07, 07:49 PM	This is a little off topic, but since we're talking about going against the DM, I figured I would ask you all about going against other players. Two people I play with, half as often as they make halfway decent characters, the other half they make annoying as the nine hells characters. Sometimes, they'll purposefully screw over that party and attribute it to their character's personality. You know what? You don't make a NE character in a CG party. And when I told them to stop acting against the party and slowing us down/and or nearly getting us all killed, you know what I got back? (From our Dm, no less). "You make a character for yourself and no one else" You know what? That's a big load of bullsh!t. I don't mean to whine, but I don't care if you wanted to try an evil character, if the party is constantly arguing and or stabbing each other in the back then its not a good party.
Eled_the_Worm_Tamer 06-06-07, 07:55 PM	As a player I find it is always, always better to work with the Dm, I know how much work goes into DMing and if your gaming with friends why would you go out of your way to ruin there efforts and detract from every one else's pleasure? As a DM, well I in nutshell if any player tried this and i found out about it, right then and there Id tell him not to turn up again, if your only purpose in turning up is to case me problems I'm not even going to give you the dignity of killing your character, you leave and in game you go off on one of your sidetracks, never to be seen again. Life is too short to game with people like that.
darkneolink 06-06-07, 07:57 PM	Yeah but this game is suposed to be FUN for evryone not just his... so why don't we make a compromise so we all can ahve fun
windscar18 06-06-07, 08:13 PM	..."You make a character for yourself and no one else" You know what? That's a big load of bullsh!t. I don't mean to whine, but I don't care if you wanted to try an evil character, if the party is constantly arguing and or stabbing each other in the back then its not a good party. Well...for who else do you make the character? You're certainly not making the character for someone else, and the DM's that tend to attempt to enforce a balanced party doesn't really get anywhere. The thing is that you're looking at it from the view as a DM. Look at it as a player: the player wants to have fun. If they want to go at each other, they might be dumb, but they have the right and if they find it fun, go ahead. I know, it's frustrating, and you can always invoke Rule 0 if you're so obliged, but ask the player's why they do these type of activities.
CryoSilver 06-06-07, 08:35 PM	I had a player in my group once that told me he would choose feats, spells, and make decisions geared towards disabling the campaign in order to watch me stress it. I would have said "Really, okay; I'll run the game in a way that'll disable your ability to play, too. How about we game at 10 in the morning? That's your math class, right? Yea, thats sounds good. Be at my house at 10."
Prom 06-06-07, 09:09 PM	Hi All, A very important question. I think this all comes down to teamwork between players and DM. The spirit of DnD is teamwork, otherwise we could play Warhammer, Chess, Warcraft, etc. The DM presents hook's you follow the ones that work, for everyone. In combat the party of characters will be working against the DM to defeat the enemy, this is acceptable. Prom
Ilaro 06-06-07, 09:19 PM	I have a guy in my group who is like that, he usually ends up dead lol.
On_the_wings_of_TPK 06-06-07, 10:08 PM	I never understood why players even tried these pointless games with the DM. There is no way they can win at it. I'm sorry the DM controls the world and just about everything in it. You wanna walk away from the plot, ok have fun in the bar, the rest of the party is going adventuring. You want to try and kill the plot NPC... ok now your running from his orginazation who want vengeance for his killing. You want to destroy the plot device, fine enjoy your trek out to the fires of mount Doom. Actually what gets me are the tards who think that they can somehow "break" the game with uberkins. There is nothing you can do that can't be negated with something, or straight out disallowed. further if you are out shining the rest of the PCs the DM has a couple of options: 1) Nerf you through the types of encounters. Rogue, bring on the plant undead constructs., spell caster, welcome to the dungeon of high SR, mellee goon? Meet Mr Shoots-a-lot-with his-Bow. 2) Work with the party to up there power level. Not really hard, usually it is just a matter of a couple of feets here, or there, and upping a stat or two. I have yet to find the unplayable concept. 3) Boot your sorry arse from the game. I see no reason to waste the effort of DMing for a douche who is just trying to ruin everyone else's fun. Lifes too short to game with morons.
Teh_Darkness 06-06-07, 11:00 PM	I try to work with my DM I know its a hard job and doesnt need more work. Though if he's being a real jerk I usually go through the three strike rule. 1.) strike 1 tell him the situation 1 on 1 mono e mono outside of game like "We dont need a DMPC in party we have six PC's as it is." or "We are constantly having to run away from battles and never fight anything reasonable for our level and it has to stop." for example its only fair to give warning. 2.) strike 2 Utilize ways in game to hint at the situation with your character example "The gods obviously favor us because this High Ranking Celestial Paladin is always dogging at our heels even when we tell we dont need his aid." or "Friends the gods are cruel indeed this is the seventh Red Dragon Dracolich Wyrm we have come across yet strangely we were looking for a band orc raiders." 3.) strike 3 Try constantly in game to annoy the DM within the rules of the Core books of course. Because you've tried talking, and you've tried hinting and now your just sick of it..This guys a jerk and you may as well leave with flair. Try to get him to lose his cool and make a fool of himself because frankly he deserves it at this point. I've been to strike 3 once and for me its fun to knock jerks down a peg or two before you leave. Also by the time I hit strike 3 I have a group already.
AAB 06-06-07, 11:02 PM	This is a little off topic, but since we're talking about going against the DM, I figured I would ask you all about going against other players. Two people I play with, half as often as they make halfway decent characters, the other half they make annoying as the nine hells characters. Sometimes, they'll purposefully screw over that party and attribute it to their character's personality. You know what? You don't make a NE character in a CG party. And when I told them to stop acting against the party and slowing us down/and or nearly getting us all killed, you know what I got back? (From our Dm, no less). "You make a character for yourself and no one else" You know what? That's a big load of bullsh!t. I don't mean to whine, but I don't care if you wanted to try an evil character, if the party is constantly arguing and or stabbing each other in the back then its not a good party. i have never personally met someone who tried to beat the DM, but i do have a huge problem with this. some people just can't think logically enough to realize that even the most evil character in the world probably will not try to destroy the party. maybe steer them into situations where the evil PC benefits or whatever, but adventuring is profitable. if word gets out that DoomMaster, the evil PC, backstabs party members he will never be asked to join a party again. he may even have adventurers go after him for the fame involved with slaying the marauding villain.
BigRobC101 06-07-07, 06:44 AM	Nomrally i play with the dm's we have, bar one.... i dont mean to play against him, he just seems to bring out the bizzar idea's out of me, cos he just uses super power npcs to force us to do the plot arc he wants us to, and therefore i end up breaking his game by out thinking his plot, such as the Infernal(from the epic handbook) that captured us when we where lvl 12, and so the game broke down a bit into be polymorphing the rest of his npcs into cubes of sugar and eating them.
NinjaPenguin 06-07-07, 08:07 AM	Polymorphing NPCs into sugar cubes. I have to remember that one. :D In all seriousness, I have to throw in with everyone else here. I only ever tried to **** off a DM once, and he was a blatantly railroading, favoritism-showing, 3.5-rules hating... yeah, you get the idea. His plot was so contrived and arbitrary, and his rewards were so lopsided, I decided the only way to deal with it was to play a Vow of Poverty Druid/Shifter. Yes, the 3.0 Shifter, precurser to Master of Many forms, the uber-broken one. Needless to say I made him make a fool of himself as he tried to kill my character off and failed each time. I managed to lure the Pit Fiend that was after us into (somehow) trace-teleporting to us as we hop=skipped throguh a churck of Pelor. Good times. But yes, I have to agree, except in extreme situations like this, you should give your DM the benefit of the doubt, work with him, allow your character to want to pick up on his plots he worked so hard on. If my character might otherwise be cool and neutral to a particular plot hook, i'll usually slightly modify my views to be at least passingly interested, perhaps to become fully embroiled in it along the way. After all, we're here to play a game, not sit around in a bar. :)
Thubby 06-07-07, 10:39 AM	I play the character I made. the DM should know that, and have ways to motivate multiple character types. im not going to jump through hoops to make a campaign work, but im not going to try to mess one up.
Selgard 06-07-07, 10:43 AM	This may seem like an arbitrary distinction, but: we always played against the Monsters, the critters, the villains, the NPC's, the BBEG's, and their nasty plots. In as much as the DM controlled them, i suppose we were against him, but it was never (at least, not to me) a question of Us vs Him. it was Us vs the Badguys. and he controlled the bad guys. (sort of like on a sports team. it's your team vs their team, but you don't hate the coach of the other team.. )
Zandolit 06-07-07, 02:19 PM	To me, playing "against the DM" seems childish if it's being done for no reason other than that the DM is an "authority" figure. It's pretty arbitrary, and may speak to some issues outside the game. I think it's silly to play against the DM because the DM is the DM. That doesn't mean you always have to go along with the plot. If you have an idea that would be cool and add to the campaign (and to the fun everyone has,) go for it, even if it means the DM has to rethink things a little. Games are a collaborative process. I think "playing your character" only goes so far. If every now and then to stay in character you have to do something that isn't in line with the DM's plot, it's fine, play your character. If this issue is coming up over and over and over, though, it's probably time to consider making a character more appropriate to the setting. I try to go along with the DM's plot as much as possible, because in my experience it makes things less chaotic and more fun for everyone. I've found that the plot-breakers tend not to have any better ideas, other than breaking the plot. The one issue I have is that my mind works in weird ways, so I'm always coming up with logical, workable methods of solving problems that the DM failed to anticipate. I don't do it on purpose, it just happens. My DM is really good about it, though. If my plan makes sense, and works, I can do it even if it screws things up a little for him. (It would really get on my nerves if he didn't allow creative solutions.) One time I managed to get information at least three sessions before I was supposed to... but I didn't know that at the time, so I just went for it because I could. The DM was gracious about it. There are times when you can legitimately go against what the DM is planning, but if it happens constantly and for the sole reason that the DM is the DM and so should always be thwarted, I think it's a maturity issue.
green_yawgmoth 06-07-07, 02:48 PM	A player who continually tries to futz up everything just because he can will not be playing in my games for very long, and if he is within melee range, may end up with something cracked or bleeding, depending on how well he takes my "you're an ass and you're screwing up the game just to spite me, GTFO before I crack open your skull and see if there's really a brain in there or just a hamster on a wheel" sendoff. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
zzo38 06-07-07, 02:56 PM	O, I play with the DM, against the DM, and how my character would act. (Doing all three ways is the best way to play the game!!) I want the DM to do the same, play with us and against us. I often do things the DM doesn't expect, but mostly because it is what I find useful or just to try something. I also don't know whether or not the DM expects it or not. I also tell the DM to make the game harder and the DM doesn't know how (mostly because he isn't very good at version 3.5 so I ahve to tell him all of the rules).
BloodDragon 06-07-07, 05:19 PM	I'd preffer to work with DMs, but then I ask: "Hey DM! Could I have this" and he says no. Sometimes it's reasonable to say no like asking for a metamagic feat or Two Weapon fight, or some insane magical item for free. Alot of times its not reasonable. I preffer doing things for RP reasons. For instance if I asked for "Signature spell" for free at 1st level (which I use to ask every DM) Signature spell: Give you now real bonus... it just lets you make your fireballs look like skulls, or spiders, etc instead of fire, and +2 to the spell craft DC. Alot- if not all- DMs have told me no. Why? Mabye they think I'm gonna use it as a prereq for some other feat. That's not the intent and I tell them that, and the answer is still no. Hmn. Having been said no, to too many times, I came to these boards one day for help... and was pointed in the direction of the Op Boards... Now I walk the path of darkness. I have not asked a DM for anything since that day ... and I use all my character By-The-Rules, just so I can incorperate simple RP themes into my characters. So no, I usually find myself fighting with most DMs sadly... I honestly wish I wasn't though. I once heard a story about "2nd edition" where rules were more laxed and Role Playing themes were easier to create. -sigh- Edit: Spell thematics not Signature spell.
Geezer 06-07-07, 06:12 PM	Out of character, I always work with my real life DM. I have knack for memorizing some obscure detail of the rules, they day before we will use it (unintentionally), and as such the DM has gotten in the habit of asking me how said obscure detail works before breaking out the books, and I am very honest with how it works, even if it works against our party because those are the rules. In character, I play against the DM. I DO NOT play against the game itself. I do not attempt to ruin the game in any way, shape, or form. It is sort of like chess, we each take our turns acting and reacting to the choices the other makes, with each party intending to be the winner. I am not fighting the DM, I am fighting the pieces he puts on the board (literally and figuratively), with the pieces myself and the others have put on the board. D&D is a game, and a game with 2 sides. But just because you "lose" doesn't mean you still can't have fun.
ATroubledMarco 06-07-07, 07:13 PM	There is a feat just to make your spells look different? Geez, I'd just let you do that for free, provided there was something explaining the fire damage on your spider balls . . . Anyways, I'd hope that most players would create their characters with the idea of trying to synchronize well with the campaign's intended mood, setting, plot, etc. Not that they have to do everything the DM expects, or even do so on average - but when a character's motives and attitude clash frequently with the direction the DM wants to go, over and over, it puts a lot of stress on the DM to compensate, forces him to do a storeroom of extra work he did not anticipate or want, and takes away from the part of D&D he finds fun. In such cases, "playing by your character" is "playing against the DM," and at that point, it's probably time for a reroll (unless your DM is more setting-oriented than story-oriented, of course - then he intends for at least some of the characters to have their own goals and motivations that his world can react to).
LoneStranger 06-07-07, 07:34 PM	Honestly the answer is: it depends on the DM/GM. I've played with killer GMs, monty haul GMs, and middle of the road GMs but the only time I will try to work against the campaign is when the GM is a raving moron. The killer GMs and middle of the road GMs are friends of mine so I know what their game styles are like and are ready for those, and any monty haul GMs usually lose my interest since "hey I can ask for anything I want and get it" just gets dull honestly.
pinkbunny 06-07-07, 07:41 PM	with the GM, though I have a saying: "don't give the GM ideas"
bob_the_great 06-07-07, 08:19 PM	last game I played the DM was incompetant. after suffering enough of his railroading, nonsensical, and frustrating DMing I shut down and waited for his campaign to end and someone else to take over. I had two options: continue to suffer or have fun undermining him and ruin the game for everyone else in the process (talking it out with the DM wasn't really an option, or at least would not have been a better option than suffering through it). anyone who would choose the latter option is selfish and likely a bad person.
Thubby 06-07-07, 08:26 PM	I'd preffer to work with DMs, but then I ask: "Hey DM! Could I have this" and he says no. Sometimes it's reasonable to say no like asking for a metamagic feat or Two Weapon fight, or some insane magical item for free. Alot of times its not reasonable. I preffer doing things for RP reasons. For instance if I asked for "Signature spell" for free at 1st level (which I use to ask every DM) Signature spell: Give you now real bonus... it just lets you make your fireballs look like skulls, or spiders, etc instead of fire, and +2 to the spell craft DC. Alot- if not all- DMs have told me no. Why? Mabye they think I'm gonna use it as a prereq for some other feat. That's not the intent and I tell them that, and the answer is still no. Hmn. Having been said no, to too many times, I came to these boards one day for help... and was pointed in the direction of the Op Boards... Now I walk the path of darkness. I have not asked a DM for anything since that day ... and I use all my character By-The-Rules, just so I can incorperate simple RP themes into my characters. So no, I usually find myself fighting with most DMs sadly... I honestly wish I wasn't though. I once heard a story about "2nd edition" where rules were more laxed and Role Playing themes were easier to create. -sigh- your thinking of spell thematics. signerature spell is very different, with alot of prerequisits, and pretty powerful. if youve been asking for signerature spell, then you have been asking for the wrong thing
BloodDragon 06-08-07, 01:41 PM	your thinking of spell thematics. signerature spell is very different, with alot of prerequisits, and pretty powerful. if youve been asking for signerature spell, then you have been asking for the wrong thing I would have been asking to the proper name at the time, with the FR setting book sitting in front of me egar to show the DM like any good novice, which was oh so many years ago. Spell Thematics was it? Thats probably it. Excuse my decaying memory.
Paladin_Hiroshi 06-20-07, 09:38 AM	I play with my DM, because let's face it, I've put lots of work into my character, he's put lots of work into his campaign setting. I'm not about to go PC: hey, the heir to the throne! *throws fireball* DM: :eek: PC: Hey I'm chaotic Neutral! DM: :eek: That happened when a new player joined our group. Except it was a little more.... PC: hey, the heir to the throne! *throws fireball* DM: :eek: PC: Hey I'm chaotic Neutral! DM: Make a reflex save. PC: Damn, a two. DM: The court druid summons an elephant above your head, take 10000000000000000D6 humiliation damage. Get out. The players all agreed, and we never played with that guy again. I follow my DM's plot hooks, provided they match what I'm roleplaying, and seeing as my DM is a good, close friend, they usually do.
Fluffykins0 06-22-07, 10:03 PM	Honestly, I do my best to play with the DM and his stories. However, I have played in games where it didn't matter what you did, it felt as though you were competing with the guy running to get your character to survive. It's tough luck, but those sorts of games can be fun sometimes.
maharai23 06-23-07, 08:03 AM	Meta is bad. Picking up on DM clues and using them, either for or against the DM's plan, is Meta. Thus, it is bad. The most I can see this being ok is during character creation. But bear in mind, the DM is a player too. Just because he has a different title does not mean he's not at that table, every session, trying to have fun, trying to make sure everyone has fun, drinking the same Mountain Dew, and eating the same Funyuns. In fact, a DM often puts hours of pre-session work into making sure the PLAYERS have a memorable session. Why on earth would you ever deliberately counter that, except for spiteful and petty gratification? Oh, and as a DM, I don't try my hardest to "win". I try my hardest, as I encourage my players to do, to play the creatures RIGHT. If there's 9 wolves, and 4 people at a camp, they'll likely attack. If 6 die with no person at the camp falling, the other 3 will likely run, even if it provokes an Attack of Opportunity, even if those wolves have a good chance of dropping someone. These things make sure that while I do try to play my creatures aggressively, I also don't make any creature more than it should be, whether that's physical changes, or mental qualities.
Radijs 06-23-07, 08:09 AM	I almost always try to play with my dm. Especially when I write my background I make sure to put in a few people or places that are important to my character. It makes my character easily motivated.
PandaDragon 06-23-07, 12:58 PM	as it goes: against, with, with, against, with, against, with. I always seem to roll low stats and the DM never lets me reroll. Eventually I reform and refine my character and backstory to somthing I'm happy with and the DM can agree to. Then I try to do things in the game the DM might not have thought of (sure every town has a upper district but the seedy part of town has more to do, slay, and rob). I never try to break the game but some times I say something stupid and give the DM an idea I realy didn't mean too (dragons with monk levels=badidea). Then I will setout on a campain to distroy what ever sick, twisted, or just plain stupid creation my imagination may have spawnd. After that its all good intill I say somthing stupid again.
vineyard 06-23-07, 01:35 PM	For the most part I play with the Dm. In alot of the campaigns I have been in recently the DM's have come up with some fort of altered class or race they have or they talk a good bit about a type of character a DM would like to see. In all of these campaigns I seem to be the only person who makes a character around these ideas. What I have found is that the DM's hate having anything really bad happen to a character type that they themselves wanted.