Rant -- GM Control, Taking it Too Far?

[S'mon]

I
As for backgrounds, I think that sword cuts both ways, too. I've seen players abuse the hell out of a background to give their character all kinds of neat-o stuff that the rules otherwise forbid. So, in instances like that, I think the GM should be able to full-on veto a background if necessary.

I had a player recently who subsequent to the death of his PC, informed me that his PC was unkillable, because his background "which I had approved" said he was cursed to be killed by a red dragon, ergo he could not be killed by anything except a red dragon. I kicked him out right away.

 

[FireLance]

I dunno. I think the GM has ever right to disallow silly names, especially if they're run contrary to the established theme/tone of the game. Frex, I gamed with a guy who came up with outrageously stupid character names like "Mister Nuckinfutz" during Shadowrun games.

This did not amuse me (as the GM) or any of the other players, as we had all agreed beforehand that these games were to be serious in tone. We all explained to the player in question what the issue was, and he refused to hear it, explainig that acting like a moron was how he had fun. *Sigh*

In retrospect, at that point, I should have told him to pack his stuff and leave. He was breaking the agreements that he had made prior to play, refused to compromise (even a bit), and then cried to high heaven when NPCs reacted accordingly to his outrageously stupid names.

As for backgrounds, I think that sword cuts both ways, too. I've seen players abuse the hell out of a background to give their character all kinds of neat-o stuff that the rules otherwise forbid. So, in instances like that, I think the GM should be able to full-on veto a background if necessary.

It's not a player/DM issue. It's a question of whether the person insists on having fun on his own terms even though he knows it's at the expense of other peoples' fun. In other words, whether he is a jerk or not. The solution is simply not to game with jerks, whether they are players or DMs.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

the part that really stuck in my throat, was when he said, "if I'm going to spend hours upon hours preparing a game so I can DM it for other people, my enjoyment needs to come before theirs." This, I don't get.

While it sounds like your DM is being inconsistent and unreasonable, this much I certainly agree with him on.

The DM-to-player ratio of "work" done for a campaign varies from "pretty high" to "infinite." If I'm doing the work, I'm running the game I want to run, the way I want to run it. My responsibility is to be as transparent as possible about that attitude in general, and what it means specifically to the game. Your responsibility as a player is to decide whether the kind of game I want to run will be fun for you, and if so, to adhere to the standards I want.

I'm not just some pawn in his world, there to play for his pleasure. We are all in this together. Doesn't it need to be fun for everyone?

Yes, it does. And he's telling you -- again, granted, with seeming inconsistency -- what it takes for the game to be "fun enough" for him to justify the work involved.

I have a player in my game with whom I have minor run-ins occasionally over things like this. The most recent was that he believes that PCs should have script immunity ... he believes no PC should ever die unless the player actively wants the PC to die. This is not the kind of game I run, nor is it the kind of game I'm interested in running, and I have been very, very clear from the outset. So he -- I assume -- weighed my flat rejection of script immunity against the fun of my game -- as he's done every time we've butted heads about game-style -- and decided to stay in the game.

I am not a big believer (understatement alert) in the perfect ability of "market forces" to solve problems. But in the case of DMs and players in an urban environment (and soon enough, anywhere with Internet access), the "market" works. DMs that don't deserve players will lose players. You (the OP) live in San Jose. I live 50 miles north of you, and I know of three or four games in the SJ area. If this DM doesn't work for you, you have a lot of options.

 

[architectofsleep]

I dunno. I think the GM has ever right to disallow silly names, especially if they're run contrary to the established theme/tone of the game. Frex, I gamed with a guy who came up with outrageously stupid character names like "Mister Nuckinfutz" during Shadowrun games.

This did not amuse me (as the GM) or any of the other players, as we had all agreed beforehand that these games were to be serious in tone. We all explained to the player in question what the issue was, and he refused to hear it, explainig that acting like a moron was how he had fun. *Sigh*

In retrospect, at that point, I should have told him to pack his stuff and leave. He was breaking the agreements that he had made prior to play, refused to compromise (even a bit), and then cried to high heaven when NPCs reacted accordingly to his outrageously stupid names.

As for backgrounds, I think that sword cuts both ways, too. I've seen players abuse the hell out of a background to give their character all kinds of neat-o stuff that the rules otherwise forbid. So, in instances like that, I think the GM should be able to full-on veto a background if necessary.

As for your particular situation, as we've really only heard your side of it, I don't think I can fairly weigh in on the matter.

Quite true. I'm trying to represent myself realistically, but I'm probably putting myself in a slightly better light, and maybe my GM in a slightly worse light. I think overall I'm getting some great advice on how to handle this, and it's giving me a chance to vent so I don't go all crazy on my GM.

I ended up replying to him and trying to be very mollifying. I told him I wasn't planning on quitting over a name. I emphasized being open to compromising, and if that was still off the table, that I'd either let the animals go nameless or let him name them, so as to avoid conflict/misunderstanding (yes, this is a bit of sour grapes on my part). I thanked him for considering my request, and assured him that I would accept his final ruling and let it drop. I did mention that I didn't think the concept of light-heartedness had a gender-bias, and that I didn't understand where he drew the line on "silly," and I tried to explain to him the origin of my name selections. I also apologized for how I must have put things that got his dander up so bad.

What I didn't say was, if I continue to be micromanaged, unfairly IMO, then I will, politely and suddenly, have a lot of other things to do and need to take an indefinite (though probably permanent) hiatus from the game. I don't want to burn any bridges as far as friendship goes, and perhaps he'll run a game in the future that won't require so much micromanagement. But if not, no great loss, and I get to keep my friends.

 

[architectofsleep]

I am not a big believer (understatement alert) in the perfect ability of "market forces" to solve problems. But in the case of DMs and players in an urban environment (and soon enough, anywhere with Internet access), the "market" works. DMs that don't deserve players will lose players. You (the OP) live in San Jose. I live 50 miles north of you, and I know of three or four games in the SJ area. If this DM doesn't work for you, you have a lot of options.

Hm. I have tried bayarea meetup. I met a couple of games through that, but they didn't meet my standards. I know of some other games as well, but most are full. Currently I have a line on a possible two through another gamer friend of mine, but they may be full as well. I get into most of my games by knowing a player/GM from another game. Where do you find them

If you know of any GMs seeking players (and the GMs aren't micromanagers), then please feel free to send them my contact info. jmmitchell @ yahoo . com My name is Jennifer.

 

[jdrakeh]

I had a player recently who subsequent to the death of his PC, informed me that his PC was unkillable, because his background "which I had approved" said he was cursed to be killed by a red dragon, ergo he could not be killed by anything except a red dragon. I kicked him out right away.

I haven't actually run into this in too many high fantasy games — but I've seen it in the various oWoD White Wolf games more times than I can accurately recount (thankfully, not in many of the games I was running). I think it's one of the curses of established metaplot.

I did play a lot of AD&D 2e with one guy, though, who always wrote up a "seventh son of a seventh son" or "an orphan with a mysterious past" or a "prophecied savior of worlds" and so on. Always. That and Ninja. In fact, I recall him demanding to play Japanese Ninja in game settings that had no analogue to the Far East.

This guy fully expected whoever was GMing (usually me, unfortunately) to support these kinds of things mechanically. Even after it was explained that if he wanted those thing to have mechanical meaning, he would have to buy the related mechancial effects as a part of his character. Which he almost never did.

I think that went on for several years in several different groups until another friend of ours found out that if you gave this guy enough Awesome, he'd use it to snuff his own characters. Much hillarity ensued, though those are tales for another thread.

 

[jdrakeh]

It's not a player/DM issue. It's a question of whether the person insists on having fun on his own terms even though he knows it's at the expense of other peoples' fun. In other words, whether he is a jerk or not.

That sounds like a player/DM issue to me. . . or are players/DMs not people

 

[Aus_Snow]

The DM shouldn't try to legislate the tone of the player characters. You can't legislate gravitas, or, more accurately, attempts to do so end up being sillier than campaigns that embrace lightheartedness. Many DM's aspire to Tolkien's heights. Do I need to discuss how many succeed?

My experience is that a campaign worth taking seriously will be taken seriously by the players, despite the presence of animal companions w/pun names.

My experience also shows me that the silly and serious can co-exist peacefully in D&D --hell, in the entire fantasy genre. A campaign can contain jokes without being a joke campaign. Our long-running 3.5e game is a testimony to that, as is our new 4e game, come to think...

Then again, my experiences - as DM and as player, over many years, with many people and groups - run entirely counter to that. *shrug* And as for 'aspiring to Tolkien's heights', why not? Life's short an 'all, so hey, why not do something really ******* amazing, in whatever way appeals. Mind you, I did score, oh, about as low as one can as a Casual Gamer (from memory), in the Laws quiz. Says it all, I suspect. I R srs gamahz!!1! Heh. But yeah, kinda.

So really, there probably is no 'right' answer here. Sure, I know where I tend to stand on such matters, whether I'm DM or player. But that's what works for me and my fellow gamers.

I just hope you (architectofsleep) can work something out with a group you get along with, be that the current one or the next along.

 

[FireLance]

That sounds like a player/DM issue to me. . . or are players/DMs not people

Okay, so I was using the term rather loosely. What I meant was that problem players and problem DMs have more in common with each other than with other players and other DMs respectively.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

If you know of any GMs seeking players (and the GMs aren't micromanagers), then please feel free to send them my contact info. jmmitchell @ yahoo . com My name is Jennifer.

I'll ask around for you, Jennifer, and pass on your info when appropriate.

I've had the most luck with a local Bay Area forum called "Critical Hit," but it seems to have gone away. (It was at "www.cilibrin.net/rolldice.) I'm very surprised it's gone, as I used it when I found my first 3E game in 2000, and I got a couple of players from it as recently as six to eight months ago. Shame.

There's a "Gamers Seeking Gamers" forum here on EN World (I just found a good online game using it), so you could give that a shot. Also, there's a great game store in Santa Clara called Game Kastle that I know hosts several weekly D&D games. (I can't vouch for the quality of those games, but I can vouch for the approachability of the gamers I met through Game Kastle when I lived in Los Gatos.) They'll certainly have a "Gamers Seeking Gamers" physical bulletin board.

You have a huge advantage going for you, being a woman. While it's true that there are a fair number of gamer guys just looking for gamer girls to hit on, it's also true that most mature DMs would love to increase the female-to-male ratio in their games, because women bring different -- usually positive -- things to the table than male gamers do. Because of this, you even have a good chance of wedging yourself into a "full" game.

What I'm getting at is that if you make the effort to find games, I wouldn't be surprised if, within a month, you have literally eight or ten you can choose from.