|
Post by Malex on Jul 15, 2014 6:04:48 GMT -8
I'm finally crawling out from under the rock I've hidden under for over a year thanks to GM Burnout, and having purged the Meta-Gamey, Munchkins from my primary group. Now I am in a second group I joined in January and have been playing with every few weeks, and I am seeing a disturbing trend that affects my decision to GM a game for them. One of the players likes to read over everything, even when the GM has told them not to. This apparently has happened on more than one occasion with the two GMs in the group, much to those GMs' chagrin.
I have offered to GM Star Wars: Edge of the Empire, and the reception has been positive. I asked everyone over Facebook to come up with a character concept before we would look into the core book, and then I'd suggest to them the Occupation & Specialization(s), Obligations, and Motivations that best suited their concept descriptions. I also want them to develop some relationships about how the characters met and led to forming their group; very much in the wheelhouse of Fiasco or FATE. *Jib should be proud*
However, I have one player who is circumventing this exercise and is looking at the mechanics ahead of schedule. Granted he is a Star Wars fan and conveyed to me his idea weeks before I began the Facebook exercise; so he was already ahead of the class in regards to developing a concept. Now a brief tangent; this same player always wants to be the 'Fighter-type who wields a large sword' and has even in a 1920s CoC game tried to do the same thing. I was able to persuade him to try something else by offering him the ability to use his Star Wars knowledge in-game when he succeeds on checks (and get a lil bonus XP), as this would help keep the immersion since I don't have to pass out notes or say things out loud that only his character would know that he would then have to regurgitate for the rest of the party. While I know the fine line I'm walking, I hope it works out for the best and I may keep you posted.
Back to my other issue: Since having been persuaded to play an Explorer Occupation the player began to look into the rules supplemental book for Explorers. To this I told him that I'm keeping to the core book for now, as this is the groups first go with the game. I'm willing to open the flood gates later, but for now I want to 'keep it simple, -'.
My experience as a long time GM, cannot believe it has been over 10 years, has my Red Flag waving high in the air that I have a Power-Gamer/Munchkin. Now, what do I do about it? I've deftly handled people like this in the past and the group had a lot of fun, but my skills are rusty and advice is always helpful and appreciated.
Thanks ahead of time.
|
|
|
Post by uselesstriviaman on Jul 15, 2014 9:16:09 GMT -8
It's your table. If you choose not to allow supplemental splatbooks, then inform your players and nip it in the bud before it can become an issue.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jul 15, 2014 10:42:27 GMT -8
First... There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping your game to just the core book.
However... I think your seriously jumping the gun by labeling this person a munchkin, just because he's looking at some splat book.
Also, I'm not at all keen on the "Don't anyone learn the rules ahead of time" idea...
|
|
|
Post by guitarspider on Jul 15, 2014 13:01:35 GMT -8
Also, I'm not at all keen on the "Don't anyone learn the rules ahead of time" idea... Clearly you're just another munchkin.
|
|
|
Post by Malex on Jul 15, 2014 18:39:02 GMT -8
It's not just the curiosity of jumping to the splatbooks that has me inking up my rubber stamper, it is what the other two GMs have told me coupled with my own experience with the player. He's not as bad as some I've gamed with, but it is still something.
|
|
tacoslaad
Initiate Douchebag
Posts: 23
Preferred Game Systems: D&D 2 thru 3.5, WhiteWolf titles, Shadowrun, Rollmaster, Star Wars, and yes, Amber diceless
Currently Running: D&D 5th ed. Just finished a Savage World Game.
Favorite Species of Monkey: Howler Monkey!
|
Post by tacoslaad on Jul 15, 2014 19:38:03 GMT -8
Congratulations! I love to hear another GM taking up the screen again, even after just a year. I've spent most of my gaming days behind the screen and I know how that burnout goes. It sucks and it's always a bit rough when you get back on the horse.
As far as this player goes, I say let him run around all he wants within your playground but make sure he knows where the edge of that playground is. Most borderline munchkins I've played with are pretty manageable if they know how far they can push it and what the consequences are if they go past that. I see working with a player like that as akin to a new babysitter dealing with a child. The kid is going to push the boundaries until they figure out exactly how far they can push it and then they tend to settle down. Borderline munchkins do this by asking questions, telling you about what they know and what they have found in this splat or that one. Usually, this is in the hopes that you might find this stuff as cool as they do and, if you do, maybe you will let them use this cool mechanic in your game. Guys like that aren't usually looking to derail your game or even steal the spotlight. They just want to have a cool character and the mechanics is how they know how to do that.
I really hope your game goes well. Let us know how it goes.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jul 16, 2014 23:53:41 GMT -8
I really don't think, as adults, saying "don't read this book, yet" works. I understand your rationale but, personally, I'd feel a bit like I'm back at school and revert to type by defying the very instruction given. Rather explain your intent and continue with character gen as stated - concept first then GM generates concept within system - but don't get too hung up on people reading the core book in anticipation. Change perspectives, wouldn't it better to have a player, on handing him back the PC you have helped generate, who can look at his character sheet and say "ah, so my character functions 'x' way within this system". YMMV Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jul 17, 2014 2:53:46 GMT -8
Immersion: When you intend to role-play a themed game but must forget everything you know. Munchkin:When you strictly rely on roll playing to win. When you can play regardless of player group. (In fact, they just slow you down.) x-ref: Korean sponsored player. "Know assholes when you see them" appears not to apply to Malex according to some posters here.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jul 17, 2014 8:13:57 GMT -8
Immersion: When you intend to role-play a themed game but must forget everything you know. Munchkin:When you strictly rely on roll playing to win. When you can play regardless of player group. (In fact, they just slow you down.) x-ref: Korean sponsored player. I've said it before, I'll say it again, here... Absolute twaddle. When asked for a value judgement, and all the evidence you're given is "he's reading ahead.".... Yeah... I'm gonna call a foul.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Jul 17, 2014 8:52:03 GMT -8
<warms hands in the glow> Marshmallows? Aaron
|
|
|
Post by uselesstriviaman on Jul 17, 2014 9:26:55 GMT -8
Immersion: When you intend to role-play a themed game but must forget everything you know. Munchkin:When you strictly rely on roll playing to win. When you can play regardless of player group. (In fact, they just slow you down.) x-ref: Korean sponsored player. I've said it before, I'll say it again, here... Absolute twaddle. Yup, I have to concur with this. Those "definitions" are inflammatory bullshit. A player who is excited about a new game and/or setting is something I try to encourage. At my own table I've had a brand-new player (D&D 3.5) who bought two splatbooks related to his character, even though he knew I wasn't going to allow him to use anything therein. He definitely wasn't trying to optimize or game the system; he just wanted to see what kinds of cool stuff was out there for his character. In the end I did wind up allowing him to use a minor, non-break-y Feat from that book because it really was cool.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Jul 17, 2014 13:03:22 GMT -8
You will know the assholes at your table when you see them. – HappyJacks official definition of an asshole. I tried to get a general definition worked out but, well, no one seemed to want that. Now Malex is saying he intuits/knows an asshole and wants to head that off in his game, so he can relax and enjoy it. I say that’s his ironclad right. On another recent topic, dealing with bad behaviour, someone replied: the poster is to blame for having a douchebag in his or her game because if she or he were not such a needy victim she or he wouldn’t be a victim. That’s a nice sale because if you get others to buy it you can get a table of heartless douchebags into any game. And douchebags will spend allot of money on game books, especially the anal retentive ones. On that topic, too, we have an apologist for the hobby using a real straw man argument about a knife as a murder weapon comparing this to the role-playing game as a weapon for douchebags. The murderer has no mask between him/herself and uses the knife in its commonly understood design against his/her victim. The douchebag uses the role-playing to hide behind a fictional in-game persona in an ambiguous player relationship. To equate the game to a common utensil that has only one widely understood design function really comes to praise Caesar and not to bury him. It is disingenuous crap. Anyone experienced can think about how useful a role-playing game is in the hands of skilled douchebags vs a new person. This was worse than being an apologist. It negated the voice of the OP. Role-playing does attract douchebags – but it is not a game only for the fun of douchbags. That topic I referred to above was almost an exact copy of one a few months ago. And before that post there was the child molester and the rape fantasist. There is a whole segment on the show dedicated to horror stories. But the game’s appeal would have nothing to do with how full that segmant is every week. OH NOOooooo. Jesus Christ talk about the willful blind. Malex wants to avoid not having fun. God damn it. Now you want to pick on me for offering definitions? What a sad bunch. I give a true definition as equally valid and as equally well educated as anyone of yours for my game. Your absolutes are valid to the equal extend mine are: there is no wrong way to play if you’re having fun. I do not have immersion by being told Appendix N does not apply. If my character lives in Ravenloft, he has to be subject to a dice roll to know what I know from reading Bram Stoker? Seriously. And this is called immersion because it has its head so far up the arse of a rulebook led system. Maybe if the GM wants to surprise the players with a vampire the GM should be more proactive rather than outlaw player knowledge. But give it a dice roll and call it immersive. And the more dice rolls to dictate player knowledge, the less interest I have to be there. As someone else wrote, but I wholeheartedly agree from experience: In our early games, when all we worried about were our stats, our class, our level and our armor class, it was easy to roleplay: "I put my ear up against the door... do I hear anything? OK, then after we kick open the door, I draw my sword, and charge into the room!" Nowadays, it seems to be more "I made my perception check, what do I find out? OK, gimme a sec, I have to see which powers will work out best for me..." followed by shuffling of pages and reading of rulebooks. What we considered poor roleplaying ("Although I'm known far and wide as the greatest swordsman alive, it turns out I'll be better in combat if I use that Hammer of Thunderbolts with my Guantlets of Ogre Power and Girdle of Storm Giant Strength... so forget that legendary sword I spent the last three games years hunting for!") is now standard fare. How can you roleplay if the (4ed D&D) game has been designed to run like a computer game, with every allowed action already designated? Munchkinism has been built into the very rules! My munchkin definition nailed the min-maxer. I am not even going to comment on people defending munchkins. There was a question once about whether the asshole even knows he/she is the asshole. I guess it comes down to a definition no one wants to make in print. Convenient. Choke on your marshmellows, troll. And choke on it every time you tell someone who has a problem they want to solve 1) they are the problem and/or 2) there is no problem. Fuck you, in fact, because our hobby will never fix itself if it refuses to realize it has a problem. Everybody drink!
|
|
fredrix
Master Douchebag
Posts: 2,142
Preferred Game Systems: Fate, L5R, Pendragon, Gumshoe, Feng Shui
Currently Playing: Pendragon, Song of Ice and Fire, L5R, Feng Shui, Traveller
Currently Running: Fate, Coriolis, Nights Black Agents
Favorite Species of Monkey: 1970's NTV, dubbed by the BBC (though The Water Margin beats it)
|
Post by fredrix on Jul 17, 2014 13:10:37 GMT -8
If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. And the solution? "Have a good time, all of the time."
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jul 17, 2014 14:36:02 GMT -8
"That's my philosophy, Marty."
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jul 17, 2014 14:44:12 GMT -8
Personally, I smell munchkin.
If this is someone you've never play with before, I would have a very direct conversation with them about the sort of game you're interested in running and the sort of game you're *not* interested in running.
My guess is he does have munchkin tendencies, but like most players, he really wants to play, and he'll probably dial it back if you communicate clearly.
I'd still bet the contents of my paypal account that he asks to use an option from the splat book he's reading, even though you said "core book only."
I do have mixed feelings about asking the players to not read the book. I can't imagine doing that, as I rely on the players to help me remember the rules.
|
|