"I hate math"

[RFisher]

Haven't seen a player take his character from 1 to 12 and still not know what his total bonus to hit in melee is? I have, regularly.

Problem Player. This is the kind of Player who asks, "The knight can move two forward and one to the side?" everytime you play chess. It's not a problem of the game of chess, and it's not a problem of the game of D&D.

It's not as simple as that. The player has a problem with the complexity of D&D.

At my table, I would tend to see this as a problem with the DM. Whether I'm running a complex system or a simple one, if I have a player who isn't into knowing the rules, I'll just keep a copy of his character sheet & handle figuring out his attack modifier myself. It's up to me to translate what he wants his character to do into game terms, let him know--as far as his character would--the chances of different actions succeeding, & translate the results from game terms into everyday terms.

Now, it does make me happier when the system is simple enough that pretty much everyone takes the time to understand it. Which is one reason I prefere simpler systems. But I don't want a player to have to know anything about the system if they don't want to. That's not to say they might not enjoy the game more if they do, but I'll do my best to communicate with the player in everyday terms instead of jargon.

Although, I can understand that others might not be willing to do that.

 

[Ourph]

It's up to me to translate what he wants his character to do into game terms, let him know--as far as his character would--the chances of different actions succeeding, & translate the results from game terms into everyday terms.

<snip>

Although, I can understand that others might not be willing to do that.

I'm usually more than happy (actually I prefer) to handle things exactly this way. I'm just not willing to do it with a ruleset that passes a certain level of complexity.

 

[mmadsen]

It's not as simple as that. The player has a problem with the complexity of D&D. If the "problem player" becomes a good player when playing with a less complex set of rules, then obviously the problem lies in the combination of that player and a specific game.

Ourph, that kind of nuanced argument is not acceptable on an Internet message board.

 

[Abulia]

Haven't seen a player take his character from 1 to 12 and still not know what his total bonus to hit in melee is? I have, regularly.

Problem Player. This is the kind of Player who asks, "The knight can move two forward and one to the side?" everytime you play chess. It's not a problem of the game of chess, and it's not a problem of the game of D&D.

It's not as simple as that. The player has a problem with the complexity of D&D.

At my table, I would tend to see this as a problem with the DM.

(This is not directed at RFisher specifically.)

I get weary of this de facto response that "well, it must be the DM" that conveniently crops up nearly anytime someone has problem with 'X' game. Is there truly no allowance that some games are inherently more complex than others and that some players struggle with those games, to no fault of the DM/GM?

Since my quote is the first one in this chain let me state, without throwing around my considerable D&D credentials, that it wasn't the DM. It's disconcerting to have a player who's fine in several other games (notably less math intensive than D&D) struggle in a different game for no other reason then the rules.

I'm not eager to so easily dismiss a "problem player," as he's now been labeled, by virtue of the fact that the complexity of D&D is a stumbling block for them. But then, I apparently game with "morons" according to some people in this thread. :\

On a side note, the "stack of books" were all WotC core books; you don't need to go to third party publishers to build up a D&D stack.

 

[WizarDru]

Since my quote is the first one in this chain let me state, without throwing around my considerable D&D credentials, that it wasn't the DM. It's disconcerting to have a player who's fine in several other games (notably less math intensive than D&D) struggle in a different game for no other reason then the rules.

I think you're right. I also think you're right that some folks pull out the 'bad dm' and 'bad player' cards as fast as they possibly can. It's a lousy position to take in an argument, and rarely engenders any nuanced or rational discussion. Part of the problem is, of course, folks who don't read the thread, and assume facts not in evidence. When you go three quotes deep, what one person used as an example becomes the fifth person's truth to rail against...and so it goes. Curse you and your wrongfun, anyways.