Armour Dilemma: Am I Wrong Here?

[Arnwyn]

But from my player's behaviour and from some of the comments made on this forum, it seems like gaming has different social rules: social rules which entitle guests to berate their hosts for not giving them an enjoyable enough evening. Do people believe this is the case? And if so, under what conditions is it appropriate or inappropriate for the guest to do so?

No, IMO, that is not the case. And, based on your second Social Component post, I will definitely reiterate what I said above:

"Conclusion based on information given: said player is a jackhole. Nobody should have to put up with a verbal tirade by some wacko sociopath."

 

[Camarath]

Your player sound easily bored and rather tempermental. I have played with people like that in the past and have recommended to several that if they did not care about the story or social (character) interaction that they would be better off goming home and playing Diablo 2. I enjoy a group that cares more about who their characters are than what their ablities do.

 

[Numion]

Let's suppose I had made a really terrible dinner -- my recipes, which I had obviously slaved over, resulted not in a nice meal but in barely-edible swill. It would be an outrage if one of the guests, at the end of dinner, stood up and castigated me for making a bad dinner and wasting an evening he might have better spent at McDonalds. In my experience, if you go to a dinner, no matter how badly the host has screwed-up the food, the furniture or the guest list, you thank the host at the end of dinner and go home.

But from my player's behaviour and from some of the comments made on this forum, it seems like gaming has different social rules: social rules which entitle guests to berate their hosts for not giving them an enjoyable enough evening. Do people believe this is the case? And if so, under what conditions is it appropriate or inappropriate for the guest to do so?

I don't think anyone really approved what the player did.

But do still consider that your host analogy for RPGs isn't the only one. I'd rather compare RPGs to social gatherings where people play other games. Like monopoly, alias or even some sports like soccer or such. It's a group activity. DM is really just one player of the group. Sometimes the DMs finely crafted story, hours of preparation and even his ego has to take back seat for the enjoyment of the group as a whole.

In your case the fault was probably mostly your immature players, but it's still worth noting that it all could've been solved by a small tinkering of the encounter. All this could've been avoided if you hadn't followed the rules to the letter about the armors.

Don't get me wrong, you were quite likely right in your decision. But what is that worth when the gaming night was ruined or at least disturbed by these events?

 

[Teflon Billy]

I want to see the player's side of the story, myself. A campaign usually doesn't go boom like this out of nowhere.

Ask and you shall recieve

I played in Fusangite's campaign at some of the lower levels, and I have to say this player was more than a bit of a crybaby over some pretty odd stuff.

Foremost in my mind was when, as a first level barbarian witha 18 9I think) strength, he starte complaining in the first battle we ever had about having to roll a 16 to hit the opposition. this is direct quote...

"16?...16?? I wouldn't have even shown up tonight if I'd known I'd have to roll a 16! This is ridiculous!"

On another occasion, this player blew a fuse on The Fusangite (accusing him of, again "spoling the fun") when his character--having splashed his ale over a table in an inn and stuck a torch to it--was calmly informed that beer doesn't burn.

You'd have thought he'd just been told that the sun doesn't rise or that dogs don't bark. Seriously.

I haven't played this particular campaign in ages, but were I the DM this player would already be gone. The sheer amount of time The Fusangite spends in preparation is staggering. Complaining that your character doesn't get to be at peak efficiency at all times in ridiculous, indeed childish, behaviour.

This is a group of adults playing incidentally. mid 20's to mid 30's.

The player's sole means of characterization for his PC was to scream at the top of his lungs in a scottish accent at all times...but that's another story

Outside of gaming, I actually think this player has some value. He can be an allright guy, and has been on most occasions when I've been around him.

I don't know what gaming in particular does to him.

 

[danzig138]

Alrighty, after having read all of the posts, I say:
1. You handled things well enough. If someone has heavy armor, they have to deal with the side effects.
2. I'm impressed that you didn't kick the abusive player in his manly (or womanly) parts. I would have been hard pressed to avoid doing so.
3. Never split the players. Nope, sometimes, this happens, and that's that. Sometimes, players make choices, good or bad, that cut them off for a while. Good players will deal with this. It's like the Mad Monkey v Dragon Claw module (spilers) in the final test, the DM needs to deal with each individual without the other players being involved in any way. By the Never Split the Party idea, the other players should somehow be involved...thus ruining the effect of the test.

Depending on the character was running, I might have stayed to don my armor, without whining, or I might have rushed off to battle half prepared. Now, had you said "Okay, those of you who are putting on your armor are suddenly paralyzed for no reason, thus being removed from the game because I'm an mule's behind", that would have been wrong.

AFAIC, you did things right. I do know that from some of the replies, I wouldn't want to play under a few of these DMs. I'd be to tempted to abuse their generosity, while my suspension of disbelief was being shot to heck.

 

[Tiefling]

Ask and you shall recieve ...

It might be worth it to keep this player around for humor value.

 

[Endur]

If you serve a meal to guests and its unedible swill, there will be comments.

Maybe the comments will be spoken to you, maybe the comments will be spoken behind your back.

Whether or not they speak the comments to your face depends on how well they know you and how they think you will react to the comments.

Gaming is a bit more open than Dining just because its not as formal an environment, and people have different perceptions of what constitutes proper behavior.

That doesn't change the validity of the feedback. Now, the particular person who gave you the feedback may be an overly sensitive person who's feelings are out of touch with the rest of the group, but for that one person, the feedback is valid.

Tom

Ok -- now to the social component.

Here is my problem: although I've GMed for 18 years, my more usual form of entertaining is hosting dinner and house parties. My problem is, assuming I am completely in the wrong and designed an awful adventure, I'm still unused to a social dynamic where someone attacks you for putting on an event they deem insufficient.

Let's suppose I had made a really terrible dinner -- my recipes, which I had obviously slaved over, resulted not in a nice meal but in barely-edible swill. It would be an outrage if one of the guests, at the end of dinner, stood up and castigated me for making a bad dinner and wasting an evening he might have better spent at McDonalds. In my experience, if you go to a dinner, no matter how badly the host has screwed-up the food, the furniture or the guest list, you thank the host at the end of dinner and go home.

But from my player's behaviour and from some of the comments made on this forum, it seems like gaming has different social rules: social rules which entitle guests to berate their hosts for not giving them an enjoyable enough evening. Do people believe this is the case? And if so, under what conditions is it appropriate or inappropriate for the guest to do so?

 

[Ace]

Why did you set up a climactic encounter in which half the group could potentially be nerfed? Did you forget that with D&D, it's all about the gear? Never mind whether that's a good or a bad thing for now, the point is that it's true. Given that you had 10 or more hours to plan things out, couldn't you have come up with a solution that didn't require assuming that the group would fight in their pyjamas?

.

Why is it people give you a hard time when you are trying to make a valid point Hong?

Sheesh D&D is all about the gear and game balance and all of that stuff --

Change more than a little bit and whammo, what was an reasonable and fair encounter is a TPK waiting to happen

 

[Caliban]

Why is it people give you a hard time when you are trying to make a valid point Hong?

Sheesh D&D is all about the gear and game balance and all of that stuff --

Change more than a little bit and whammo, what was an reasonable and fair encounter is a TPK waiting to happen

Or a chance to truly be heroes in a situation where you aren't sure you are going to win due to all your kewl gear.

Many times being a hero is not easy. Sometimes it isn't even what you would normally call "fun", but doing the deed anyway and suriving (or dieing a glorious death) can make your character come truly alive.

As long as these situations aren't a common occurance, in which case it turns into a "DM vs. Players" situation, with the DM trying to stack the deck. And it doesn't sound like that is what is occuring here.

 

[pogre]

Ooooo Man! I hope that player shows up next session. Cast Hold Person on him followed by a petrification. Tell everybody ahead of time and watch out for the fits of all fits. Repeat until he quits your campaign for good. Also tell the party thief to pickpocket him at every opportunity. Constantly pass notes to everyone playing, but him.

Players like this are too fun not to torture.



I have never had a player go off on me - I'm a little shocked it actually happens. Naturally, all of the above is suggested in jest, but seriously, just tell the player your styles don't match and he should find another game.