-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Players who think your game is Survivor the RPG
- Thread starter JoeGKushner
- Start date
BASHMAN
Basic Action Games
Sounds Like a Problem I had.... GMing CHILDREN
In the summers I worked at a summer day camp as a counselor a few years back. One of my favorite things to do (and the kids') was to play D&D. I was the GM, and the kids learned to play on the orange 3rd Ed Boxed set (the next year we switched to OD&D, 'cause I'm old school like that).
Anyway, we had a problem of the youngest player in the game, age 6 (remember, the orange boxed set says it is for all ages!), for no reason at all said that he was going to attack his brother's character. I tried to reason with him. I said, "Are you SURE you want Rio to do that? You guys are on the same team!" He nods. "Cause if you do, he may get mad..." He shruggs. "And the other players might get mad..." Shruggs. "Your sure..." Nods. "Really Sure". Nods and laughs. "Really Really?" "Really Really." I sigh, "OooooooKay then, roll to hit"
Rio hit his brother's character with his battleaxe and rolled minimum damage. I was then SHOCKED by the decorum of the other players (age 8-12) who then only said, "Rio, we don't want you to adventure with us any more." They did not counter attack, or anything! Just told him to leave. This rejection must have hurt more than any sword wound (the kid probably just wanted to beat his big brother up for a change anyway). The six-year-olds face turned bright red, then tears began to well up, then the loudest crying I have ever heard was followed by the boy running out of the classroom, onto the playground, as fast as he could! Man, talk about a scene to have at a daycare type facility!
Anyway, I coaxed him back, and told the other players that he did that because he was charmed by the evil wizard they had fought last adventure. They knew it was a cop-out (kids are not dumb), but they accepted it anyway because they knew that the 6-year-old playing Rio the barbarian did not really mean them harm-- he just wanted to see if his character could beat his brother's!
Anyway, I think these kids had the maturity to come up with the answer your players were lacking. Maturity-- getting over petty squabbles and getting back down to what really matters: killing monsters and stealing their treasure.
In the summers I worked at a summer day camp as a counselor a few years back. One of my favorite things to do (and the kids') was to play D&D. I was the GM, and the kids learned to play on the orange 3rd Ed Boxed set (the next year we switched to OD&D, 'cause I'm old school like that).
Anyway, we had a problem of the youngest player in the game, age 6 (remember, the orange boxed set says it is for all ages!), for no reason at all said that he was going to attack his brother's character. I tried to reason with him. I said, "Are you SURE you want Rio to do that? You guys are on the same team!" He nods. "Cause if you do, he may get mad..." He shruggs. "And the other players might get mad..." Shruggs. "Your sure..." Nods. "Really Sure". Nods and laughs. "Really Really?" "Really Really." I sigh, "OooooooKay then, roll to hit"
Rio hit his brother's character with his battleaxe and rolled minimum damage. I was then SHOCKED by the decorum of the other players (age 8-12) who then only said, "Rio, we don't want you to adventure with us any more." They did not counter attack, or anything! Just told him to leave. This rejection must have hurt more than any sword wound (the kid probably just wanted to beat his big brother up for a change anyway). The six-year-olds face turned bright red, then tears began to well up, then the loudest crying I have ever heard was followed by the boy running out of the classroom, onto the playground, as fast as he could! Man, talk about a scene to have at a daycare type facility!
Anyway, I coaxed him back, and told the other players that he did that because he was charmed by the evil wizard they had fought last adventure. They knew it was a cop-out (kids are not dumb), but they accepted it anyway because they knew that the 6-year-old playing Rio the barbarian did not really mean them harm-- he just wanted to see if his character could beat his brother's!
Anyway, I think these kids had the maturity to come up with the answer your players were lacking. Maturity-- getting over petty squabbles and getting back down to what really matters: killing monsters and stealing their treasure.
rushlight
Roll for Initiative!
I love Diplomacy, and games like it. One of my favorite games is a card game called "Illuminati: New World Order" by Steve Jackson. That game is centered around making deals and screwing people.bubbalin said:
When I play, I appreciate the art of the game, regardless of the outcome. I've been royally duped - and laughed about it after the dust clears! I can appreciate the skill it takes to win at that game.
I can't understand how someone could take it personally. I have played INWO with some people who do, though, and I won't again. One guy sold his cards after a particularly nasty round... Poor guy can't seem to seperate fact from fiction. It's like getting mad at someone over a sly move in a game of chess.
Well, I can honestly say I have never quit a game because of another player.
In the past I have quit games due to the referee. In one group I used to game with, just about every player also ran some game or another, or at least tried. Now, I can tolerate bad refereeing while a player is learned the trade, but we had this one guy who was absolutely the worst DM I have ever encountered, which is saying a lot given all the people I have played with in both organized groups and at conventions over the last 27 years. To make matters worse, this guy had been a DM for over 15 years. His problem? He liked killing PCs off. Our characters got killed so often that they rarely lasted more than three gaming sessions and that was with a group of 8 players. If his hands weren't on the table you would have thought he was wanking off from the shameless glee he took in his "well crafted kills" (like killing a first level fighter with an inexplicably inescapable ambush by 10 ogres is well crafted). After tolerating that nonsense for about 3 months, the rumbling started, as we turned from a group of players to a wannabe lynch mob. About a month later, I finally got fed up, told him exactly how pitiful a DM he was, and I quit. That was like opening the floodgates on a dam. Three weeks later, the group had completely collapsed, with only one player and the lousy GM left. Last I heard of him, when he was transferred to another state, he finally gave up DMing and gave away all his books. Too bad we couldn't make him quit earlier.
Anyway, that was almost 10 years ago, the group fragmented almost completely, some of us ceased playing for years, but it has slowly been building back up to its old self, with the various players distributed in 3 different smaller gaming groups.
In the past I have quit games due to the referee. In one group I used to game with, just about every player also ran some game or another, or at least tried. Now, I can tolerate bad refereeing while a player is learned the trade, but we had this one guy who was absolutely the worst DM I have ever encountered, which is saying a lot given all the people I have played with in both organized groups and at conventions over the last 27 years. To make matters worse, this guy had been a DM for over 15 years. His problem? He liked killing PCs off. Our characters got killed so often that they rarely lasted more than three gaming sessions and that was with a group of 8 players. If his hands weren't on the table you would have thought he was wanking off from the shameless glee he took in his "well crafted kills" (like killing a first level fighter with an inexplicably inescapable ambush by 10 ogres is well crafted). After tolerating that nonsense for about 3 months, the rumbling started, as we turned from a group of players to a wannabe lynch mob. About a month later, I finally got fed up, told him exactly how pitiful a DM he was, and I quit. That was like opening the floodgates on a dam. Three weeks later, the group had completely collapsed, with only one player and the lousy GM left. Last I heard of him, when he was transferred to another state, he finally gave up DMing and gave away all his books. Too bad we couldn't make him quit earlier.
Anyway, that was almost 10 years ago, the group fragmented almost completely, some of us ceased playing for years, but it has slowly been building back up to its old self, with the various players distributed in 3 different smaller gaming groups.
Psion
Adventurer
If I feel someone's behavior at the game is spoiloing the fun for others, no vote needed. I'll kick them out myself.
That said, if the problem is personal and has nothing to do with the game, I will brook no personal disputes at the table and people should resolve it themselves.
Unfortunately, I have been in both situations.
That said, if the problem is personal and has nothing to do with the game, I will brook no personal disputes at the table and people should resolve it themselves.
Unfortunately, I have been in both situations.
Saeviomagy
Adventurer
d4 said:
Well, diplomacy really is a game where each player IS lying to and screwing over every other player. Not a character of that player - the player themselves. Winning in diplomacy is the equivalent of killing off fellow PCs so as to make him 'lose'. Once you beat someone, they're out of the game, and their personal level of fun is reduced.
Beyond that, it's not your character and your character's skills doing it, it's you, personally.
If you personally browbeat someone into supporting your move into vienna, then that really does reveal something about YOU. YOU are the person who bullies.
If you personally lie to someone to support a move into vienna, backstabbing them in the process, then it really was YOU who did it.
You don't have a character sheet which says "my character is a manipulative bully". You are not playing a part. You are playing yourself, aiming for a goal that is (in the context of the game) more important than your morals, ethics, friends and the like.
Last edited:
d4
First Post
we must be wussy Diplomacy players, because 95% of the Dip games i've played have ended when a particular alliance meets the victory conditions. i've hardly ever played Diplomacy all the way to a single victor.Saeviomagy said:
when playing alliances, it's often possible to share in a win without having to lie or betray anyone.
of course, that's not really how the game is meant to be played!
Olive
Explorer
I've got a similar situation. well, kind of similar.
I've got a player who is a bit funny. She'd never played RPGs before, but she's read a lot of fantasy novels and stuff. The problem is that she is just frustrating to play with. She barely roleplays, and doesn't seem like she's having fun. More than that, two players have left the group. Both left for various life reasons, but last weekend they both said that they would like to play again, but they don't like playing with the girl in question.
I'm not good at confrontation, plus despite the fact that she seems like she's not enjoying it, she always tells me out of game sessions how much she IS enjoying it. Plus, she's a staff member of the organisation that I'm an elected representative of, so we kind of work together...
It's tricky. She's the only member or former member of the group that I'm not actively friends with, and I'd liek to play with the other people again. But it seems unfair to kick her out when she's not distruptive as such, and seems to really enjoy playing.
Sigh.
I've got a player who is a bit funny. She'd never played RPGs before, but she's read a lot of fantasy novels and stuff. The problem is that she is just frustrating to play with. She barely roleplays, and doesn't seem like she's having fun. More than that, two players have left the group. Both left for various life reasons, but last weekend they both said that they would like to play again, but they don't like playing with the girl in question.
I'm not good at confrontation, plus despite the fact that she seems like she's not enjoying it, she always tells me out of game sessions how much she IS enjoying it. Plus, she's a staff member of the organisation that I'm an elected representative of, so we kind of work together...
It's tricky. She's the only member or former member of the group that I'm not actively friends with, and I'd liek to play with the other people again. But it seems unfair to kick her out when she's not distruptive as such, and seems to really enjoy playing.
Sigh.
