I don't think so. None of my boardgame rulebooks have a chapter on this. Loveletter does have a brief sentence of two saying that people who cheat at such a lighhearted game as it should know better.
TTRPGs: broken mechanics vs. abusive players
Mad_Jack
Legend
And at that point, the character would find his spellbook or signature weapon had been hijacked and the thieves were demanding their entire ransom in copper pieces...
OMG... Flashbacks to the guy in the 4E game who insisted his wizard was harvesting "magic item components" off of literally every single last creature that we killed - we had to drag a 16-ft. giant alligator half a mile to our boat, strap it to the side for the trip home, and after all that effort to keep him from whining about it... we were forced to cut it loose because we were being chased and it was slowing us down...
The worst part was that the fool's character was at least five levels from being able to make a damn magic item.
One thing is that a lot of these combinations or scenarios are actually really cool the first time it happens.
But these are repeatable games, and it is far less fun the 10th time it is done. It does feel like the game is made less interesting when we go around systematically eliminating the 10x case.
But these are repeatable games, and it is far less fun the 10th time it is done. It does feel like the game is made less interesting when we go around systematically eliminating the 10x case.
Thomas Shey
Legend
Though you're probably true with "thoroughly obnoxious", the same design principals also apply to less severe cases that are probably as common as not in gaming groups.
Thomas Shey
Legend
It'd probably help if people all had the same standards as to where the line is. I've seen people indicate, in effect, that they aren't willing to play with people who have any problematic behavior at all. If you go by their standards, a lot of people would never game at all.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
But he was connected enough to sell those harvested parts to others, right? If yes, there's all the rationale he needed.OMG... Flashbacks to the guy in the 4E game who insisted his wizard was harvesting "magic item components" off of literally every single last creature that we killed - we had to drag a 16-ft. giant alligator half a mile to our boat, strap it to the side for the trip home, and after all that effort to keep him from whining about it... we were forced to cut it loose because we were being chased and it was slowing us down...
The worst part was that the fool's character was at least five levels from being able to make a damn magic item.
Mad_Jack
Legend
But he was connected enough to sell those harvested parts to others, right? If yes, there's all the rationale he needed.
Given the fact that the character refused to tell us which spells he had prepared* (I asked the player which powers he'd taken, and gotten some bs answer about the wizard being "mysterious"), I'm pretty sure the character had no friends to speak of...
*As if you couldn't figure out a 1st-level 4E character's power loadout after a single day of adventuring... This was also the same guy who decided that because he was a dwarf and had proficiency in hammers (He'd gotten the DM to allow his magical implement staff to have a hammer head on the end...) that his character was a capable melee combatant.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
At 1st level a Wizard is a capable melee combatant, more or less.Given the fact that the character refused to tell us which spells he had prepared* (I asked the player which powers he'd taken, and gotten some bs answer about the wizard being "mysterious"), I'm pretty sure the character had no friends to speak of...
*As if you couldn't figure out a 1st-level 4E character's power loadout after a single day of adventuring... This was also the same guy who decided that because he was a dwarf and had proficiency in hammers (He'd gotten the DM to allow his magical implement staff to have a hammer head on the end...) that his character was a capable melee combatant.
It's as the levels advance and the Wizard's fighting ability doesn't that the difference becomes more stark.
But I have to say, on the face of it this character sounds like it had some serious entertainment potential.
Mad_Jack
Legend
Greenstone.Walker
Adventurer
It's never worth it. You should always design for the general and worry about exceptions later (or not at all).
As posted earlier in the thread, if there's a rule that breask the game then the best reaction is to have the mature discussion, 'This rule breaks things, let's all agree to not use it."
On the odd occasion where mature discussion doesn't work then congrats you've just identified one or more obnoxious players.
The next step is to consider whether or not you want to continue this gaming with them (maybe change to a different game, maybe kick them, maybe leave, lots of options here).For example, I am not using forcecage as a box again in 5E. Why? Because it just plain sucks for a player to spend the next 10 turns doing nothing. We've all agreed that my players won't do it to a single foe either, because it sucks for me to spend the next 10 turns doing nothing. If there are multiple foes then they will happily use forcecage (or banishment or similar) to take out one foe while fighting the rest.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
