Are you a problem player and if yes why?

Just out of interest, do you think you are are problem player?

Let me start, I admit that I am hard to game with or at least to please.
Thats because I consider every challenge to be a puzzle and I want to solve it myself (or rather I want the group to solve it). And I get very disappointed when I get the feeling, justified or not, that the DM is making things easy, either by a string of beneficial coincidences or by flat out houseruling.

That alone probably wouldn't make me a problem player, but what I consider a challenge many other people consider to be a distraction to be glossed over. Getting the dragon hoard back to civilization (and avoid it being taxed or outright stolen) is for me as much of a enjoyable challenge than slaying the dragon in the first place. And while the DM wants to fast forward to our arrival at the desert temple I would rather spend the session organizing an expedition to said temple and make sure that we carry enough water, can navigate the desert, etc.

Not for anyone I play under.

Any time I think I'm going to become a problem player, I excuse myself from the campaign. If I excuse myself from enough campaigns for a single GM, I politely refuse any further offers.

I try not to be pushy, but whenever we get in to harrowing combats I aggressively suggest lines of play for my allies. It's probably my biggest failing as a player. I will one day learn to bite my tongue, but it's hard to stay quiet when our lives are on the line. I do try to keep it brief and frame it as a suggestion, but I know what I'm trying to do.

Nope. Whoever is running has the floor. Rules mongering ruins game enjoyment. If I don't like the way a game is being run, like Nagol says, I politely excuse myself and withdraw from the game.

There are people with whom I do not game well with.
Or maybe they don't game well with me?
Either way, we've solved this by not gaming together.

As someone who, unlike a couple of the above posters, does not have the benefit of multiple gaming invitations, multiple local tables of D&Ders or a large selection of people to choose to play with, and instead must "make do" with the players that are available, I will tell you this: everyone has quirks. Whether those quirks are blatant enough to be considered a problem depends more on the DM than on the player with those quirks. I can handle "quirky" players better than a lot of DMs because I simply don't play into their quirks. For some people, this is enough to cause them to quit a game and I will honestly tell you those people were most likely attention grabbers who played up their quirks for no other reason than to get group attention focused on them, instead of the game.

But because of this, I know I can come across as distant and aloof at gaming tables and I have had people express to me that they are unsure how to read me, and unsure if I am actually enjoying the game. Even other players have complained when I take a "sit back and watch" approach with the game. I try to moderate this when people bring it up because it's just something I do unconsciously. I have always been the sort of person who is laid-back and quiet in social situations and some people, especially in IRL social situations just don't get this, and it upsets them.

I have a preference for powergaming when building a character, I can get upset by DMs who like to provide cryptic situation situations and games where it doesn't feel like any of the solutions are in the hands of the players. I try to excuse myself from games that upset me, since I'm here to relax and enjoy a good game but if I'm upsetting other people by how I play, someone has to tell me, I can't divine that stuff myself, I'm not a cleric.

As always, problems are best addressed rather than left unaddressed. I really do try not to cause problems for people and try my best to deal with those that do, but there are always a few irreconcilable differences between me and the occasional player. I do like to think though that I've never been outright called out as the "problem player", but that could simply be tact on their part. When I discuss problem players with other table-members, I always do it when that problem player is not present, as that would simply be rude, unless they have of course done something so drastic as to warrant a call-out.

Of course I'm a bad player. All players are bad players, just ask any game master.

My particular form of badness takes the form of disengaging from play if the story line doesn't interest me or the GM isn't confident or well prepared.

I want to play. Could be deep RP, could be combat, could be whatever. I get annoyed when people slow it down. If people are looking up a rule I'll often just blurt it out to speed play, but it has annoyed people who think I'm showing off or a know-it-all. I'm not interested in waiting 15 minutes for the guy who hasn't leveled up between sessions like the DM told us to do, let' sjust start and he can work it out as we go along. I get annoyed when people do things like calculate each individual bonus of their attack for every attack in the same round - you just figured it out for your first attack, why can't you remember it's +7 and just add that instead of + 3 for strength, +3 for proficiency and +1 magic weapon, OUT LOUD, each time.

While I enjoy building optimized characters, I like playing characters who are the same level as the group. This annoys me when one other person is either much stronger or weaker. Weaker I'll give advice, and it may not always be welcome. More powerful my thoughts are "I toned to down to match the group, why can't you". Of course, that's partially because back in the 3.0 & 3.5 days I was quite the optimizer but my priorities have shifted that it's more fun to work as a team.

(Okay, occasionally I will build "super optimized support character" who just makes everyone else more awesome without stealing spotlight and not worry how tightly they are min-maxed compared to everyone else.)

I don't mind spending a whole session RPing with each other (fleshing out the characters, not advancing the plot ) if surrounded by similarly inclined players. But if not everyone is into the back-and-forth I'm probably one fo the people who slow down play according to them.

Oh, and I have no problems having a character who fears and motivations get them into trouble. No, I'm not a chaotic player, I've gamed with plenty of them and am not fond of the breed. But I've stood by friends instead of running even though it would mean a near-TPK. (*cough* ~3 sessions ago) I've counseled against combat because hydras are scary, not following the meta that the DM put it there to overcome. I've had my CG character argue with a LG paladin that we needed to collapse the dwarven mines behind us because the foes were using them to send forces in.

Most in-game problems I generate...and I do generate some...stem from my sometimes having the boredom threshold of a field mouse.

Party approaches what is probably a dangerous situation ahead. Party stops...and plans, and dithers, and plans, and...in goes my character (regardless of whether it's a character suitable for leading the way or not) because I'm bored and want to see what's around the corner. In fairness, the party usually back me up once this happens; but I still end up dead far more often than I'd like. Which makes me grumpy; which can't be much fun for anyone else.

Lanefan

SwivSnapshot said:

All players are bad players, just ask any game master.

Click to expand...

Nah, I've known more than a handful of non-bad players.

As for whether I am a bad player or not... I don't think so. The only problems that arise at the table as a result of my inclusion as a player are if the DM feels like they have to do something special or work harder because they have a DM (me) as a player, and that's not really up to me because I do everything I can to enable and encourage people to DM, not stress them out with "Well, if I were running..." type of stuff or unfair standards.