Wolfpack48
Adventurer
Maybe because they aren't a player at all.
What makes a "bad GM" or a "bad player"?
But I am?Maybe because they aren't a player at all.
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Okay buddy, that's a step too far.
Oh sorry, need to translate that into high Gygaxian:
In the hallowed halls of antiquity, thy utterance hath traversed realms unseen, veering perilously beyond the bounds of camaraderie, yon companion. Verily, 'tis a stride too vast, a leap into the abyss of excess!
Campbell
Relaxed Intensity
The biggest thing is not taking an active interest in each other's contributions or demanding which exact way someone is allowed to contribute. You should not just be waiting for your turn to speak.
Self-identifying with either the setting / NPCs if a GM or your individual PC as a player.
Self-identifying with either the setting / NPCs if a GM or your individual PC as a player.
Bad players:
Cheat/fudge their rolls (or try to)
Read the module they're playing in
Deliberately try to derail/disrupt sessions
Refuse to learn their character abilities/spells (and/or won't switch to something less complex)
Regularly zone out during other players turns, and have to ask what's going on when it gets back to them. Emphasis on regularly, we all zone out from time to time
Bad GMs
Don't prep appropriately for their game
Deny player agency
Play to "win"
Cheat/fudge their rolls (or try to)
Read the module they're playing in
Deliberately try to derail/disrupt sessions
Refuse to learn their character abilities/spells (and/or won't switch to something less complex)
Regularly zone out during other players turns, and have to ask what's going on when it gets back to them. Emphasis on regularly, we all zone out from time to time
Bad GMs
Don't prep appropriately for their game
Deny player agency
Play to "win"
SableWyvern
Adventurer
If we're honouring the OP's request to ignore "bad fit" then I agree this doesn't make a bad player. The social player is certainly a bad fit for serious-business-only roleplaying, but not inherently bad.
I still stand by my original point that if you eliminate bad fit, you're literally only left with "unequipped to engage in social activities".
I don't know, I think lots of folks in this thread have articulated some gaming specific behaviors that qualify.
SableWyvern
Adventurer
Even blatant stuff like cheating on rolls (to take a recent example) isn't necessarily a problem with the right group. There are plenty of people out there who would say that if it's that important to the player that they get the roll they want, they're ok with it.
DM abuse of authority and selfish rules lawyering I don't see gaming issues, but as social ones -- those are just examples of people who can't play nice, and those traits are going to carry over into other aspects of their lives as well.
Essentially, I'm suggesting that every problem can by resolved by one or both of:
- Finding a compatible group.
- Having a genuine interest in getting along, and all parties being willing to have a reasonable conversation where they listen and take on feedback.
Breaking Star Games
Explorer
I think I can boil it down even further to not respecting the fellow people at the table. If everyone is coming from a place where they regard the others feelings with appreciation and support, I think that covers most bad behaviors - even bad fit where they will either flex or understand its best to not play together. Not the most actionable unfortunately, so I like the thread digging into many specifics.
What are more actionable are: Safety Tools, check-ins (like Stars and Wishes for feedback), Session Zero's and really explaining your style and premise of your game from the start. The latter is really helped with playing more specific TTRPGs but as long as you're willing to explain what you want out of the game, then even the most universal system is fine.
Similar Threads
