Forums of the Megaverse®

<begin rant>

Last night at the end of the game everyone was saying about how one PC was just soooo weak in comparison to everyone else, and I ought to let her have more stuff to be up to par. I wasn't paying much attention, since my thinking is she chose weak superpowers and could have made a powerhouse with better decisions. But I discussed it with a fellow GM on the way home and when he heard what I was dealing with, he told me to get the character sheets for all three and deconstruct them.

Final results - one had questionable rolls (4 out of the 8 stats must have had a bonus die), the other had saves and combat bonuses I can't account for.

I'm through. Between that and the arguing GM calls that happen almost every game, I'm through. I've got the honest player looking for more players, I'm looking for more players, and the game is on hold until I get at least two more.

The honest player did bring up a good point - if they were deliberately cheating, they would have cooked the books and sent me flawless character sheets. But the arguing still happens despite a warning having been issued.

<end rant>

In many of the game I've been in, it has been standard practice that all aspects of character generation had to be done in front of the GM, if not the entire group. This was not only to prevent cheating, but also so that the GM and other players could offer suggestions and ensure a coherent vision of what the campaign would be like.

That said, it sounds like your campaign had some issues that were festering for a long time. I can only wish you luck in finding a less taxing group.

Yeah, my table recently imploded too. A couple of players moved away, and I was left with a core of people whose role-playing skills were somewhere between sub-par and abysmal. I kept the life support plugged in for a few more months, but it finally became too much effort, so the table dissolved.

I lamented the fate for a few hours after it happened, but then I came to the realization that I wasn't happy when I was GMing for these people. Preparing the kind of games that they enjoyed playing was torture, and leading them by the hand through the simplest of puzzles was depressing.

Since that time (a couple of months ago) I have been preparing games that I find interesting and challenging. Making characters that I actually want players to explore and expand. And generally just remembering how great it is not to argue with imbeciles.

I am still looking for a new table, but that will come with time. Until then, I am going to re-learn what it was I loved about being a GM.

I'm sorry your table fell apart, but don't fret. Think of it as a vacation to recharge your batteries, rather than an end.

Good luck, and keep on gaming!

All sides should be happy, yeah. It's a tall order.

Though it seems you have player issues often, is it the local crop of gamers or do you have expectations that go undiscussed?

Alrik Vas wrote:All sides should be happy, yeah. It's a tall order.

Though it seems you have player issues often, is it the local crop of gamers or do you have expectations that go undiscussed?

I think it's the local crop of gamers. I have gamers I'm happy with, that I rarely see due to scheduling. I've run into a few munchkins that just can't resist pushing the boundaries, and I won't tolerate that. I hate kids that are undisciplined, which is why I've parted ways with a couple of gamers. And while I'm open minded, the last group had people with severe Asperger's Syndrome, and their symptoms caused a good chunk, if not all, of the arguments. It has to do with lack of social skills and lack of empathy. They (the more severe) simply can't conceive of anyone thinking differently than they do, can't handle the frustration of something unexpected happening, and don't have the social skills to not charge in like a bull in a china shop when they think something should be a certain way. I can understand it, I live with an autistic daughter, but it doesn't make being on the receiving end of a meltdown any easier.

Edit: To give an example, last night they were debating what to do about a poltergeist. The player argued the area should be larger than 30 ft and the poltergeist shouldn't have a save. And I really shouldn't have to say to the other player "Don't add +4 to your strike, parry and dodge that the book doesn't give you."

Yeah, that can be a pain.

I twist and jumble and legally combine stuff. A lot. But flat out cheating. Really. In a game about make believe you must cheat. Lmao.

When a game becomes a cheating contest every one loses

Agreed. I love supers. My favorite characters. My buddy memnoc brought up an interesting point. Yea you got super powers but you also have like HALF as many skills as non super occ's.

arouetta wrote:<end rant>

Doesn't sound good. I hope you find some good players. Wish you the best of luck. Maybe give you some time to recharge your GM batteries too.

I feel blessed by Rurga or something, with the players I have when I hear these types of stories.

arouetta wrote:

Alrik Vas wrote:All sides should be happy, yeah. It's a tall order.

Though it seems you have player issues often, is it the local crop of gamers or do you have expectations that go undiscussed?

I think it's the local crop of gamers. I have gamers I'm happy with, that I rarely see due to scheduling. I've run into a few munchkins that just can't resist pushing the boundaries, and I won't tolerate that. I hate kids that are undisciplined, which is why I've parted ways with a couple of gamers. And while I'm open minded, the last group had people with severe Asperger's Syndrome, and their symptoms caused a good chunk, if not all, of the arguments. It has to do with lack of social skills and lack of empathy. They (the more severe) simply can't conceive of anyone thinking differently than they do, can't handle the frustration of something unexpected happening, and don't have the social skills to not charge in like a bull in a china shop when they think something should be a certain way. I can understand it, I live with an autistic daughter, but it doesn't make being on the receiving end of a meltdown any easier.

It depends if there's a metagame expectation of 'The group HAS to stay together, even if the PC's disagree violently with each other' or whether the players can't stand any other player playing differently to how they they play.

If the players respect each other, what's wrong with a PC running in like a bull in a china shop when they think something should be a certain way?

If it's more the latter, it's like they can't figure out how to get anything except by complaining to the GM (or cheating). I certainly listen to polite, occasional player requests for things (one player wants his PC to transform into something like a dragon hatchling, for example, and I'm considering it). But players just trying to say so and so should have X, or directly arguing things - well, I had one player wanting his cyborgs knock out roll to work (despite it being a cut and paste from an SDC setting) - ie, to work on anything, knocking out an elder dragon on 19-20. I said no at the time and he let it go (though I'm thinking of a compromise method now). It's tricky to figure out where the line lies between when you compromise and when you just say no, but it's important to figure out.

Noon wrote:If the players respect each other, what's wrong with a PC running in like a bull in a china shop when they think something should be a certain way?

You misunderstand. The player was very aggressive towards me personally, sometimes to the point of shouting for long periods, when I issued a call he didn't agree with. Not the PC.

I talked with everyone, I gave it one more shot (I claim temporary insanity), found a whole bunch of new players, and then was informed by two of three of my old players that they expected preferential treatment because they were the "core group" and the "old players". When I said no, everyone new or old gets treated fairly, in the same way, I was accused of railroading and told I should write a book instead of GMing a game. I was even told that the old players could simply tell the new players that they weren't needed if fairness was expected. No, not happening.

Shoulda elbowed him in the teeth and cut his face with a broken ashtray. Game fine. Intiate combat irl. I am not playing.

arouetta wrote:

Noon wrote:If the players respect each other, what's wrong with a PC running in like a bull in a china shop when they think something should be a certain way?

You misunderstand. The player was very aggressive towards me personally, sometimes to the point of shouting for long periods, when I issued a call he didn't agree with. Not the PC.

Okay, I thought it was the PC doing that in the fiction.

I talked with everyone, I gave it one more shot (I claim temporary insanity), found a whole bunch of new players, and then was informed by two of three of my old players that they expected preferential treatment because they were the "core group" and the "old players". When I said no, everyone new or old gets treated fairly, in the same way, I was accused of railroading and told I should write a book instead of GMing a game. I was even told that the old players could simply tell the new players that they weren't needed if fairness was expected. No, not happening.

You know some people just like wielding power over others and bullying them? The game doesn't matter to them - it's just a way of attempting to wield power over others - it's a certain cowardly practice.

One of their tricks is to make so much noise you forget to ask yourself 'Did I ever, EVER enjoy doing any sort of activity with you?'

Did you ever enjoy doing roleplay with these guys?

You got players being disruptive and disrespectful to gm and other players the he/she should get cut from the team

Anyone who is not there to add to everyone's fun gets the boot.

The problem with Bad Players is they drive off Good Players.

Nuke any bad player before they ruin the group.

My game is happily out of a coma now. 5 solid players with promise of a sixth.

arouetta wrote:My game is happily out of a coma now. 5 solid players with promise of a sixth.

Good news indeed! Best of wishes on that sixth as well!

Nightmask wrote:

arouetta wrote:My game is happily out of a coma now. 5 solid players with promise of a sixth.

Good news indeed! Best of wishes on that sixth as well!

I think it'll be cool. He's moving and internet access is spotty, which is why he's not formally there yet (we've switched to an internet game). However, one night while packing he popped in the room to watch and his side comments had us dying with laughter.

One of the other 5 is also a GM and if I need a rule clarification, he's got it, but he's not trying to take over the game.

I my new group.

Okay, I fudge characters ALL THE TIME. I actually do it because I once played with a guy that had the gall to look you in the eye as he pushed his dice to a better number. I made this character alone but I couldn't keep the attributes. This particular example was actually just last week when I was called for an online game with a friend who moved to the north and wanted me to be a support character since none of his players had played rifts before. Stats are (including bonus roll of if you get a six roll again until you don't get a 6 or 30 (standard rule for us).
IQ: 28
ME: 20
MA: 24
PS: 15
PP: 16
PE: 19
PB: 23
SPD: 13

In my groups we do fudge the rules for humans: if all of your attributes are 3D6, you can put them where you want to by choice and you also disregard 1's. But that being said all was agreed upon before I made the character.

At the end of the day, I didn't think a Scholar & Adventurer character needed to be that powerful, especially if I'm mostly there to help the GM teach them how to play rifts.

If you have players cheating, boot them from your group. That's it. If someone wants to fudge something up or down a few bits and asks you (and has a good reason), that's fine. But if they want to just right out cheat, **** 'em. They're not worth the time.

I know what you mean. When I opened my game up to new players, I had an overwhelming response. One guy sent me his character, it broke so many rules I couldn't even make it past the first few lines. I told him to try again. He came up with something that I never got around to dissecting, but clearly had skills not in the books that I had said to use (the HU books only). I told him to go somewhere else.

I want players I can trust. With the group I have now, some are powerhouses, but I'm confident that they just got a couple of lucky rolls and are book legal.