The harder, the better - dm

[Bran Mak Morn]

It seems you're missing the point, any Dm who says "play your character my way or else" needs to re-evaluate why they are being a DM in the first place. The DM is supposed to facilitate the fun, not enforce his idea of a players character on the player. If he wants to use two bastard swords the rules allow it.

As far as D10 weapons go all the martial ones have +2 prof bonus and cost 10 or 15g, the bastard swords require a feat have +3 prof bonus and cost 30g. So is a Feat and 30-40g more of your small starting cash really worth +1 more to hit? if the player feels it is, then that's his decision.

Ibixat, the thing here is that I don't want my players to play my way or else, as you say, because I always let my player choose their own path without restrictions. I had chaotic evil players as well as assassins and evil warriors...the thing here is that I don't like people who play a certain carachter JUST because they found out that is the more powerful, even if they dislike... Eladrins for example...as I said, mine were just examples, not absolute truth..but maybe I'm just confusing RPG with board games...or maybe I read too much LOTR

 

[Jack99]

In my campaigns, you get one attempt to abuse the rules with liberal interpretations of the RAW.

After the first warning, if you insist on trying to be a shifty, rules-lawyering d-bag, I'll show you the door.

You can go dry hump the corpse of 3.5 with the powergaming fanboys.

I should sig this. But since we are trying to tone down on the edition war, I better not. But it made me laugh out loud, thanks.

 

[gizmo33]

Lots of Power Players uh?

I'm a DM 99% of the time. On those rare occasions when I do play I prefer bards or courtier-type characters because I don't really care about rolling dice. That being said, as a player I'm plenty willing to partner up with a power gamer or two and sing their praises - someone has to kill the monsters.

NO they just wabnt the best output, they would do the Tiefling Babysitter if only he had some 10(W) "Blockbuster Movie to watch while he sleeps" Daily Power

Power gamers can be somewhat boring to DM if I do it too much. They tend to ignore the more subtle elements of the game. However, that's just a difference of preferred game style and not a case of one person being wrong.

2 Regulatory issues: ever had a player constantly referring to rules to advice other players that the DM is not being fair? TRY IT. IT HAPPENS.

Ever watch a football game and see a player argue with the ref? What happens? Does the ref just arbitrarily give the other team 10 points and let them put 5 extra players on the field? No. The offending player gets a red card. Simlarly, if a player in your game is criticizing your calls in a disrespectful way, then it's not a DM/Player issue anymore, but a Person/Person issue. I never meant to suggest that either DMs OR Players should tolerate rudeness from each other.

I dont care if the encounter powers rule below mean something or not (I know you have to rest 5 min and all the related stuff BTW ): is the approach from such players that is unpleasant "per se". THEY WILL NOT STOP TRYING TO FIND AND EXPLOIT SOME GAP IN THE RULES TO BE MORE POWERFUL (FEEL SMARTER?) THAN OTHER PLAYERS... THIS IS WHY THEY DESERVE SOME CONSEQUENCES..NOT BECAUSE IN THIS WAY I FEEL BETTER

But how is the "encounter powers" situation any different than a PC hiding behind a wall to avoid getting shot with an arrow? Is that "exploiting" a gap in the rules? Or using them intelligently? How do you know that the player is trying to feel smarter than the other players? Does he say that? A player that is rude to other players is not a Dungeons and Dragons problem, it's a real life problem, and should be handled in the same way as if you were hosting a party and one of your friends was rude to another.

4 I don't want to kill a ranger with bastard swords...I don't like it and that's all!!!! I never kill players because they don't play my way, I just mean they don't have to play in a way ruining the fun of everyone...

In the OP you explicitly said, under option 3, that killing the player was a way to handle this situation. If I was a player, I'm not sure I'd care if someone wanted to play an Eladrin or not. I'm not sure why I should care if another player wanted to use 2 bastard swords. So how exactly would having someone in my adventuring party that is better at killing things than I am be ruining my fun?

 

[gizmo33]

I should sig this. But since we are trying to tone down on the edition war, I better not. But it made me laugh out loud, thanks.

It made me laugh too, and I'm not particular wound up about the 3.5/4 E thing. I don't think powergaming is a feature of one version over the other though. Obviously the examples that the OP has used of powergaming are 4E examples. So IMO there's no way an edition of the game is going to cure prissy thespians of their dislike of necrophiliac power-gamers.

 

[rob626]

I am going to throw some support to the OP. I understand where he is coming from. It's not any one single rule that the players are weasling on. It's not that there is an honest disagreement on how a power works. He can handle both of those easily.

He's dealing with players that are looking for advantages through mechanics instead of looking for opportunities through the eyes of their characters. It's not just a single ruling here or there. It's a cumulative effect where the players are consistently and repetitively looking for an advantage in the rules that would not be otherwise present in the situation if you were just to look at it as the characters would see it.

Simply put, the players are wearing him down one little rules-lawyering complaint at a time. He's the overworked single dad that finally says "Yes, go play with the chainsaw. I just don't care anymore."

It is a conflict between playstyles and to be completely honest this will not get better by talking to the players or killing the characters. It is a fundamental difference in approach to the game. He would be better served by asking them to leave the table and finding replacements. That's a hard thing to do but, coming from experience here, it is the only way to get your table back.

The DM gets to have fun too and it's obvious his fun has been taken prisoner.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

Next time I'll find a player trying to sneak the rules in order to get some pathetic advantage over monsters, other players, the environment and/or the setting, I'll do the following in the following order:

1. Ban that player from my games. IF NOT POSSIBLE (he's a friend? he owns the house? His GF is amazingly cute?), THEN 2
2. Give the other players outrages bonuses he will never have, therefore reducing any advantage he may obtain. IF NOT POSSIBLE (unbalancing ther game?), THEN 3.
3.Kill his player in the fastest way, with monsters and traps patently ataccking him way more than other players. He'll know the reason why, and even if he complains (he will), you will know you're right, letting him know that notwithstanding the incredible combos he may aschieve bending the rules at his disposal, you will always have much more power. It is like showing Frodo what a Gandalf with the Ring would be able to do (evily) because the young hobbit thinks using the Ring from time to time is not a big deal...

Uhhh... glad as hell I'm not in your game. It sounds to me that you are a uncreative control-freak DM.

It's one thing to try wrangling a power-gamer with in-game action-reactions, it's quite another to lay down juvenile self-serving punitive responses.

 

[Bran Mak Morn]

I am going to throw some support to the OP. I understand where he is coming from. It's not any one single rule that the players are weasling on. It's not that there is an honest disagreement on how a power works. He can handle both of those easily.

He's dealing with players that are looking for advantages through mechanics instead of looking for opportunities through the eyes of their characters. It's not just a single ruling here or there. It's a cumulative effect where the players are consistently and repetitively looking for an advantage in the rules that would not be otherwise present in the situation if you were just to look at it as the characters would see it.


The DM gets to have fun too and it's obvious his fun has been taken prisoner.

That is exactly what I'm referring to!

It's not a single rule debate, it's ruining the spirit of the game, it's a deliberate effort to break the fundamental rule of a RPG. Can you remember the very two first questions asked by non players? How long does it take? AND Who win? This kind of players are indeed trying to win the game, despite the DM and the other players' fun...


Anyway, never had such players in my games, but my players switched to a couple of different DMs when I was Erasmus and came out with terrific stories, which I found true when I tested (as a player) D&D4 in Rome last 7 and 8 June...

 

[Bran Mak Morn]

Can you recall that phrase in the DMG (hope so ) saying that a power has to be used in an encounter where a real threat exists and specifying you can't take with you a bag full of rats to smash them and heal an ally?

I'm talking about this kind of bad players, doing this kind of stuff ALL THE TIME....

 

[Nifft]

He's dealing with players that are looking for advantages through mechanics instead of looking for opportunities through the eyes of their characters. It's not just a single ruling here or there. It's a cumulative effect where the players are consistently and repetitively looking for an advantage in the rules that would not be otherwise present in the situation if you were just to look at it as the characters would see it.

Stage 2 system mastery is like that.

Don't worry, they'll get to Stage 3 eventually.

Cheers, -- N

 

[rob626]

Nifft- Your comment about the Stage 2 level of play just gave me a random flashback to my world's religions course from a decade ago. Almost a total derail here, but Hinduism has something called pursharthas which roughly translate where people's priorities are.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purusharthas

I guess you could sort of pull this into our discussion in that the pursharthas are not a judgement thing but an acknowledgement thing where it helps people get along if they understand that not everyone seeks the same thing at the same time. Essentially, it's ok to have different motivations but it's best to recognize that and work with it instead of against it.

In this circumstance I would advocate finding those in the gaming world who are on the same priority.