D&D General What is an Adversarial Player?

[R_J_K75]

Very well. In the future, I'd recommend not asking a question if you are unwilling to hear the answers.

I did hear the answer, 3 weeks ago, and that question wasnt directed to you in the first place and I answered you as well. You insisted on hammering on your point. I respectfully decline your recommendation.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Classes having built in combat roles? That's so 4th Edition! Nowadays, you pick whatever you want and let the DM sort it out.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I did hear the answer, 3 weeks ago, and that question wasnt directed to you in the first place and I answered you as well. You insisted on hammering on your point. I respectfully decline your recommendation.

I think not expecting people to assume, in a hobby focused on cooperative roleplay, that that's what people consider the proper way to play generally is probably asking for aggravation. Anytime you're an outlier, especially in a way that seems actively likely to cause problems to most people, they're going to tell you that. The fact it doesn't work out that way with your own group because they have rather different expectations than seems typical isn't going to change that.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Simply put, an "Adversarial Player" is one who attempts to assert dominance of the running of the game, the rulings and the outcomes, over the DM sitting behind the screen...often by pre-selecting rules, items, mechanics, etc to bring up during the game in order to point to them and say "See DM? You're just wrong! You need to do it THIS way, as I said...".

That's my interpretation. A player that is trying to use the rules and manipulate the other players at the table to backing them over the DM...all for the purpose of "beating the DM".

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Greenfield]

Well sure. A DM needs to state up front what kind of game it will be, such as that he's planning on running certain modules etc. and get player buy-in on that front.

If a DM runs a fully linear adventure (especially if it's easy to derail) without telling the players he's doing so? 100% on them when the players, inevitably, sidetrack it. Plus, without foreknowledge, the players are just going to think they're being railroaded by the DM - and that NEVER goes well.

To be fair, I kind of trashed that Mercurial module in other ways.

Right after the party left our first meeting (with each other and the new manager), we learned that there was a price on our heads. It listed us by name.

My character quickly realized that there was only one person who knew all of our names: The manager we'd just left. Which lead to the conclusion that he was trying to scare the rock star, thinking it was the old manager doing it. That keeps her from talking to him, and guaranteeing that she'll sign with the new one.

That revelation also destroyed the module's premise and ruined the surprise we were supposed to encounter at the end.

The poorly written module was a problem. My being so pleased with myself for trashing it that way? Yeah, adversarial.

I've tried to be better about that.

 

[Greenfield]

Sorry. Duplicate post