Whiney players....

[Old Gumphrey]

In other news, is this thread really only ten posts long? Because, man, that looks weird.

Ignoring your problems makes them go away, right? Right? Bueller?

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I felt bad for him. I know he broke the rules and down came the banhammer but he was provoked and of course the ones who provoked him were clever enough to do it in way that didn't get them banned.

Isn't that weird how that works?

 

[Elf Witch]

Isn't that weird how that works?

I know you are being sarcastic but I am going to answer seriously. There is a reason so many people are going to Circvs Maximvs and say they don't come her as often or at all. One of the reason is stuff like this where you just have to swallow and swallow someone behaving like a jerk and not being allowed to tell them look you are being a jerk.

The people who do this may not be actully breaking the rules but they are breaking the spirit of the rules.

 

[Fenes]

Well, I think that some DMs are so sure they are right that whenever a player complains, it's seen as whining, since they missed all the other clues about something not being right.

In any case, there's a lot of "badwrongfun" in this thread - meaning, if someone does not like the same playstyle they prefer, he's "unimaginative" "whining", "uncreative", "pouting" and so on.

That's not the case. Sometimes, people simply know what they want, and don't want to play a game they have no fun in.

I am sure there are a lot of people who still think they know what's best for everyone,. but I do hope that there are as many - or more - who do not forget that the only goal of D&D is to have fun - for everyone to have fun. Not for everyone to play the same style.

Someone mentioned "normal dungeon enviroment". To those, it must be shocking to hear that I don't play D&D for dungeon crawling. So, dungeon crawling by itself would be a "no fun" mark for me. I can stomahc it if it happens once in a while, but if the DM is unwilling to add some other form roleplay to the dungeon crawl, then I'll quit.

If a player wants to blast stuff with a wizard, then the DM should accomodate them. That doesn't mean he can't bring the odd iron golem, or dead magic zone, but when the player indicates that a whole adventure of such is not fun, the response should be "ok, noted, won't happen again", not "stop whining, and take it and like it!!!!!".

Whining in itself is bad form, but by no means makes a complaint less legitimate. The right course of action is for the player to stop whining (if he really is whining, far too often, any complaint is seen as whining if it's kept up when it is not responded to), and the DM to either change the game to make it more fun for everyone, or kick the player out.

Does that mean a DM has to run the game the players want, even if it's not fun? Of course not. But neither should a DM expect everyone to like his game. Just because a DM likes Dungeon Crawls, and ressource management makes him not a bad DM - and neither does preferring social challenges to monster killing. But if a DM expects his way to appeal to everyone, and considers any other playstyle wrong, then he's a bad DM.

 

[Oryan77]

One of the reason is stuff like this where you just have to swallow and swallow someone behaving like a jerk and not being allowed to tell them look you are being a jerk.

The people who do this may not be actully breaking the rules but they are breaking the spirit of the rules.

I agree, it's a shame to see the OP get banned for getting frustrated at people treating him like he's a jerk. He's a new poster here and several regulars (including a certain moderator) are quite good at being pricks and flaming without actually breaking the rules. The OP just hasn't figured out how to "play that game" yet and he got banned for it.

I find it amusing how so many gamers play the overly-sensitive card and at the same time reply in a way that insults others without being blunt about it. It's the less sensitive types that have to learn how to deal with their insults without being a normal person that reacts in a normal way (i.e. telling them to shove it).

I didn't bother participating in this thread because it was just the usual responses you get when a DM posts about problems at his table. The "veteran" DMs come flocking out to pick at every word the OP writes about his game and they inform him that he sucks...and I didn't feel like sticking up for the OP only to spar with the elitists. I've come to understand that the DMs doing this aren't as great as they think they are. I've met plenty of guys that believe they are gods among DMs; yet their players talk trash about their DMing skills behind their back. They are the same type of guys that would go online and trash another persons DMing skills :\ So the OP might have made a DMing mistake...he explained himself and didn't need 6 pages worth of people still telling him he sucks when he said he has plenty of other players that don't whine about his DMing. He needed 6 pages worth of advice on how to deal with a player that'll complain no matter how well he DMs.

 

[LostSoul]

The writers of 4e seem to think that an extended "non-combat resolution system" is necessary to make non-combat actions equally important.

Or maybe they want to present a resolution system that isn't "the DM decides."

 

[Elf Witch]

.


If a player wants to blast stuff with a wizard, then the DM should accomodate them. That doesn't mean he can't bring the odd iron golem, or dead magic zone, but when the player indicates that a whole adventure of such is not fun, the response should be "ok, noted, won't happen again", not "stop whining, and take it and like it!!!!!".


.

I think this is one of the big miscommunications that has gone on in this thread. And that is people have been talking in extremes. I have been debating a lot with you over this and now you come and say what I have been saying all along. That it is not bad DMing to sometimes bring in things like dead zones, iron golems what have you.

The OP never said his entire campaign was based on things that made it hard for the blaster wizard it was two seperate sessions and he did later point out that there were things in them for the blaster wizard. It was not something that happened every seesion.

I agree with you that it is poor planning to have an entire campain with session after session where a player can't use his abilities. A DM should let a player know hey this is going to be a heavy undead campaign so players can design characters who fit into that kind of campign.

I really don't think any of us who have basically been on the side of the OP feels that it is good DMing to always set up encounters that nerf a players chosen abilities.

One of the things that was frustrating me was that I felt the other side was saying you can never plan an encounter or a situation that might not allow a player to use his full abilities. That was how it sounded. And that was what I have been debating about.

There is a difference between having a legitmate gripe and talking to the DM about it and being a whiney baby. Personally if the OP was telling it how it really was the player was not being reasonable becuase he whined about more than just the iron golems he whined when he felt that an encounter was to easy and he whined when he thought an encounter was to hard.

I think the OP was looking for advice on how to handle this player. As a DM myself I would be lost on how to deal with a player who complained about every type of encounter I made.

I sometimes get great advice here but sometimes the advice gets lost when people bring in their own bones and issues. Like in this case instead of reading that on two occasions the DM had encounters that did not allow the player to use his abilities to the max some people who may have been burned by a DM who did this all the time jumped on the wagon about how unfun it is when DMs do this that they came to play not twiddle their thumbs.

What I think they are really saying is that it has not been fun to play in a game where they never get to use their abilities. Not that they always have to in every encounter.

 

[cougent]

What's the difference?

Oh you just want me to give an example so *I* can get jumped all over for it, I see how you are you sneaky devil.

OK, here goes:
(Complaint / Frustration)
DM makes a call, any call, pick one that you like... lets say a Psionic attack that has no effect on the critter.
Player A: Huh? What do you mean it has no effect? I am pretty sure it DOES have an effect, I just re-read that right before the game tonight and I really think you are wrong on that call.
DM: I don't think so, but we can check it later to make sure. For now my call stands
Player A (frustrated even more now): Lets check it now, I really think I am right on this one, I especially prepared this attack just for a situation like this and now if you rule it down it will just blow it all to pieces!
DM: OK, 5 minutes for food and drink for anybody that needs it, lets do this fast.

(Whining)
DM makes a call, any call, pick one that you like... lets say a Psionic attack that has no effect on the critter.
Player W: What the F***? that's total BS! This is just like last week when you screwed me over on the Iron Golem thing, I prepared this attack just for a situation just like this and your screwing it all up. If John was the freakin wizard you wouldn't pull this crap, your just doing this to me, you suck! (dice fly across room)
DM response: OK, who has next initiative?

That's as close as I can get to illustrating the difference right now, if you see it then you understand where I am coming from, if you don't see it then you are obviously a lot more patient and forgivng person than I will ever be.

DISCLAIMER: the above examples represent attempts to create examples on the fly and NOT necessarily real life situations. Some dramatization and dramatic license has been taken to illustrate a point.

 

[Fenes]

There is a difference between having a legitmate gripe and talking to the DM about it and being a whiney baby. Personally if the OP was telling it how it really was the player was not being reasonable becuase he whined about more than just the iron golems he whined when he felt that an encounter was to easy and he whined when he thought an encounter was to hard.

And my point is that there are two points, which have to be treated seperately.

There's the whining, and there's the fact that a player has no fun. Simply stating "the player is whining, so he's wrong" is not correct. One has to check if one could make the campaign better suited to said players wishes without ruining it for the DM and the rest of the players. And one has to check if the player can stop whining - or, if it even is whining. (Of course, said complaining/whining can be a cause for making the game unfun for the DM or the rest of the players, so that has to be taken into consideration as well.)

But I really think too many people focus on the "whining" part, and not on the part that one player, for whatever reason there is, is not having fun in the game. And that means something is wrong. (And yes, if the personalities of the two involved people won't mesh well together, splitting seems the best option.)

 

[Fenes]

OK, here goes:
(Complaint / Frustration)
DM makes a call, any call, pick one that you like... lets say a Psionic attack that has no effect on the critter.
Player A: Huh? What do you mean it has no effect? I am pretty sure it DOES have an effect, I just re-read that right before the game tonight and I really think you are wrong on that call.
DM: I don't think so, but we can check it later to make sure. For now my call stands
Player A (frustrated even more now): Lets check it now, I really think I am right on this one, I especially prepared this attack just for a situation like this and now if you rule it down it will just blow it all to pieces!
DM: OK, 5 minutes for food and drink for anybody that needs it, lets do this fast.

(Whining)
DM makes a call, any call, pick one that you like... lets say a Psionic attack that has no effect on the critter.
Player W: What the F***? that's total BS! This is just like last week when you screwed me over on the Iron Golem thing, I prepared this attack just for a situation just like this and your screwing it all up. If John was the freakin wizard you wouldn't pull this crap, your just doing this to me, you suck! (dice fly across room)
DM response: OK, who has next initiative?

In my experience, it often happens like this:

DM makes a call, any call, pick one that you like... lets say a Psionic attack that has no effect on the critter.
Player A: Huh? What do you mean it has no effect? I am pretty sure it DOES have an effect, I just re-read that right before the game tonight and I really think you are wrong on that call.
DM: I don't think so, but we can check it later to make sure. For now my call stands
Player A (frustrated even more now): Lets check it now, I really think I am right on this one, I especially prepared this attack just for a situation like this and now if you rule it down it will just blow it all to pieces!
DM: Who has next initiative?
Player W: What the F***? that's total BS! This is just like last week when you screwed me over on the Iron Golem thing, I prepared this attack just for a situation just like this and your screwing it all up. If John was the freakin wizard you wouldn't pull this crap, your just doing this to me, you suck! (dice fly across room)
DM: Stop whining! I made my call, I won't hold up the game for this, we can check later!