Gaming group ponderance - draw attention to an expert's inexpertise?

[fba827]

Before I begin, let me say up front that I realize I'm about to sound like a big whiner... really and truthfully, it isn't like that, it just comes off that way because I'm letting this all out at once.

Okay - now for the meat of the matter...

Question: Given the situation below, should I say something and make an issue of it or let it go -- what would you do? (I already have a good idea what I will do, just wanted to explore possibilities in case there was something I wasn't considering).

Brief setup. There are 8 of us, none of us met each other prior to a year ago when we started gaming together. We get together once every 3 - 5 months because of time limitations. Of the 8 of us, 2 of us are considered "the guys that know the rules" -- one of these guys is myself the other is the person being discussed below --

(note, niether of us is the DM).

Anyway, there is one player among us (we'll call Bob) who everyone (but myself) considers to be great at knowing the rules. The thing is, he doesn't really have as firm a grasp as the others give him credit for and so when he just does or says things, they're considered to be "fine and legit 'cause Bob said he could"

It didn't affect me too much at first -

I'm an easy going sort of guy and when it was just his character able to do some things he wouldn't otherwise be able to do. But as the other players start to more and more rely on him for his "expertise" the PCs and NPCs and such are using more skewed and skewed rules ...

Some examples:
* The distinction between Base Attack bonus and total attack modifier (makes a big difference for someone qualifying for feats and prestige classes and some manuevers such as grapple -- but most notably for qualifying for multiple attacks per round)
* (similar to above) the distinction between skill ranks and total skill modifier
* caster level for spells not being the same as character level when you're multiclassed
* caster level for a ranger or paladin being half the total class level
* class level vs. character level for "class based features" (i.e. a paladin's lay on hands that is based on class level using the total character level)
* the fact that "Caster level" on magic items is not a prerequisite but rather the determinant for effects from the magic item
* bards being able to swap spells around inbetween levels
* what classifies as a light weapon (thus reducing the penalties obtained when using two-weapon fighting)
* divine casters and spontaneous casting (he keeps choosing whatever spells he wants during the course of the game often allowing him very advantageous results in the midst of everything)
* difference between the different types of sight (low light, darkvision, etc.)
- several others, but that's to name a few ...

This is starting to lead to a couple of things (mostly for me, less so for the others because they are remaining ignorant)...

As other players listen to his expertise more and more, we keep going further and further away from the core setup on rules (which in itself I don't mind, I like house rules.. but the above things as an example, it can get out of hand real fast).

Also, because his character can do things (like casting his divine spells effectively spontaneously) he can pull out any divine spell (from any of the allowed books) on a whim as needed per the situation which makes him *greatly* outshine the other divine spell casters that have gone through the trouble of preparing spells each morning.

I FIRMLY believe that the player is not intentionally doing it, he just believes he is remembering correctly and doesn't bother looking it up. At the same time, he feels insulted if you ask him for where he got the info from... (tried that very casually three or four times on a specific basis as it came up)

Now, I will say everyone seems to be enjoying themselves. I am the only one who seems to care (alebit, I am the only one who seems to notice -- ah, to be ignorant ).

Saying something to Bob runs a (very) high risk of inciting a problem... Saying something to the others in the group runs a risk of me being the "complainer and making a big deal out of nothing" (since the others have yet to grasp the rules themselves and the extent that Bob's perception of the rules is different from the core books)... Not saying something runs a high risk of our entire rules basis going to Bob's recollection of the rules rather than based on the core rulebooks.

(Again, I already have a very good idea what I will do, just asking in case there is a possibility I am not thinking of.).

What would you do? Relavent thoughts or opinions or personal stories?

Edit: Small fix in grammer; experts => expert's

 

[Drawmack]

You did state you that the two of you are the only two with a firm grasp of the rules and that neither of you are the GM. I would make up a comprehensive list of his errors, then find the references in the core rulebooks that contradict him. I would then take that to the GM and say something like. House rules are great and I love them but I think you should be aware when something is a houserule as opposed to a core rule. Here I have made a list up of the house rules that Bob has introduced into the game so that you can go over and decide which ones to keep and which ones to get rid of. Additionally those marked with a number are ones that I see a potential balance issue with and the explanations are detailed on this piece of paper. Then let the GM play the heavy, after all it is his job.

 

[Painfully]

My personal choice is to make my players look up any questionable rules in the PHB whenever possible. There are still some specific character abilities that I've never played with myself, so even as a DM I am far from having all the answers. If a player wants to argue it out though I will force that discussion to take place after the combat or game session.

Nothing is worse than bogging the game down with rule questions or arguements IMO. The players should be responsible for things in the PHB, and the DM should for everything else.

Of course, nobody can know EVERYTHING in the PHB all the time, especially things that they dont use for their own PC, or which can get complicated by combat. But considering the time between sessions is plentiful, I don't understand why the other players don't brush up on some simple facts like caster level, skill poings, or BAB.

Those are some lazy players!

 

[Tewligan]

It sounds like people kind of walk on eggshells around this guy. He feels insulted if his interpretations are questioned, and it's apparently disruptive to disagree with him. However, if you've only known him for a year, and you game that infrequently, go ahead and call him on his wrong calls. It'll apparently piss him off, but it sounds like you aren't close friends, so big deal. If he stops playing, then the rest of the group can settle in to play the game properly without you having to worry about offending Mr. Sensitive.

Hmm...I see that I sound like a bit of a jerk up above. Oh, well - it's just that I can't stand players who are big crybabies when they're questioned, like I'm picturing Bob to be. Anyway, good luck with whatever you end up doing.

 

[WayneLigon]

There are a lot of things that come to my mind.

The first thing:

There are 8 of you. Is losing Bob a bad thing? If not, talk to him and tell him what he's doing and where he's wrong. He's teaching the other people a lot of bad habits that they'll simply have to unlearn. Let him blow up and get mad, and storm out. You have the printed word on your side, and it's not like the stuff you're describing is some weird esoteric rule that could be interpreted many ways. Stuff like the BAB and what spells a cleric can cast spontaneously is pretty basic.


The Second Thing:

You only play every 3-5 months. If that's everyone's maximum level of involvement, let him do what he wants as long as everyone is having fun. The other players will either get a PHB themselves and find out what he's saying is crap, or they just don't care.

 

[Pielorinho]

Those do sound like some pretty big problems -- especially the spontaneous clerical casting business. I'd recommend taking it to your DM and talking about it.

Were I the DM, I'd want to run a few sessions purely as rules-knowledge sessions. Tell everyone that you want to get a better handle on rules, so you'll play a few sessions in which everything gets looked up. It'll slowt he sessions to a crawl, but you'll come out of them with a better grasp of the rules.

Use these couple of sessions to lay the smackdown on him. Make sure he realizes all the points that you've made above, and more.

At the end of it, if he's still stretching the rules (and I'm suspicious that he knows what he's doing, to some degree), and if you don't want to kick him out, suggest that the DM institute a broken-rules balance. If something questionable comes up during a session, the DM will let it slide. If it works in a PC's favor, and the DM find out after the session that it was a rules-violation, then the PC gets a -1 unnamed penalty to all attacks, saves, and skill checks -- essentially all D20 rolls -- in the next session.

And unnamed penalties are cumulative . If you stretch the rules in your favor three times this session, that's a -3 penalty to everything next session.

Conversely, if the DM rules against a PC adversely and the ruling is wrong, it's only fair to give a +1 unnamed bonus next session to these things -- but this only kicks in if the DM is overruling a player. (If a DM allows an unarmed NPC an AoO against a grappling PC, for example, the grappling PC only gets the bonus next session if her player points out that unarmed characters don't threaten the area around them -- if she doesn't point it out and get overruled, no bonus for her next session!)

Daniel

 

[Desdichado]

If it were me, and I had let my situation get to where you are now? I'd ignore it unless he started proposing stuff that was really wonky and I was worried about it affecting the quality of the game. I'd also back up everything I said with the appropriate quote from the relevant rulebook. Why hang on half-remembered opinions when you can just look it up?

Again, though, if I hadn't said anything about it before now, I wouldn't start unless he was really proposing stuff that was Bad.

 

[Mulkhoran]

Well, this is kind of hard to say. I mean, from the examples you posted, he's essentially undermining the very core of the system. But..........

You say, for example, that he can use Divine spells spontaneously while others are memorizing. How? If he's being taken at his word on how the game works, why isn't everyone using the rules he's postulating?

My point is, there's the possibility that there might not be a problem here at all. Unless you *specifically* don't like the changes that are made to the rules, then start using them. The comment Drawmack made on houserules is appropriate as well. Once *you* know the rules well enough, feel free to drop the occasional or frequent comment on how much fun the rules changes are.

However, if you feel it's a real problem, along the lines of a bunch of people learning the wrong rules to the game, then stand up to him. Don't ASK him about something when he quotes some gibberish that you KNOW is wrong. TELL him. In the situation of someone being told they're wrong, with the authoritative answer sitting right there in front of them in a rulebook, it's kind of hard for there to be any gray area.


The bottom line is how much fun you're having, and everyone else is having. Mainly, it seems his rule-changes aren't being applied to the other players, and that's very important. But it's all about fun. Good luck!


- Mike

 

[bret]

I would e-mail the GM giving lists of the most broken rules (of the ones you listed I would include BAB vs. Attack Bonus, Spontaneous Casting, Caster Level, and skill ranks to qualify for PrC) that the group has been using.

You want to be diplomatic in the letter, and do it outside the session. I would say something to the effect of 'We are apparently using some house rules in several areas, and I want to make sure that I understand them correctly.' This type of phrasing can work miracles when it comes to making people listen. It is really surprising how many people like to explain where someone is wrong.

The thing is to be tactful, be willing to 'accept it as a misunderstanding' when you've got something wrong, and be ready to pull out the rules references when they question you on it.

I would not send the rules references in the initial e-mail, I would just have them ready for if the GM wants them.

Last of all, if the GM reads you letter and doesn't care, go with the flow. Throw away your PHB and go with it. The group will only change if the GM wants it to.

 

[tarchon]

You see, <b>this</b> is why we need a bar exam for rules lawyers.