Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ozmar" data-source="post: 3371085" data-attributes="member: 8021">Fair enough, but I think it's kind of hard to offer concrete advice without concrete examples. I am not entirely sure whether the solution is for you to "lighten up", or to boot out the player, or something in between.I have solved some problems in my game by adjusting my own expectations. For example, I used to run my game under the assumption that the PCs need to be objectively threatened (rather than subjectively threatened) in order to feel "challenged". I would run most combats with half the party being killed or unconscious before the party was victorious. I've since come to realize that this is overkill. The players actually have more fun if they can easily handle most challenges, and only occasionally suffer casualties.On the other hand, I have also had unreasonable players. I couldn't accomodate their play styles because it would disrupt the game to the extent that I and other players wouldn't have fun. So I asked them to leave.To me, it is a matter of degree. If I can adjust my game to meet my player's tastes, I try to do that. If not, then either they need to adjust to my game, or decide they aren't having fun and go elsewhere.In your case, I am not sure what is the degree. Are you opposed to all optimization on principle? I'm admittedly sympathetic to the optimization mindset - I like to make strong characters with lots of options and cool powers. But I am also an enigmatic role-player, who doesn't mind inflicting my character with self-imposed diseases and running into the front of battle to test a theory. (He's a mad necromancer.) So I can understand if your player is driving you nuts, but at the same time, I think he has a valid desire to make the most out of his character, and that you should try to accomodate that if you can.Ozmar the Moderate</blockquote>

Verification