I think sometimes with the negotiator type attitude it is often about how they feel about the subject matter. They feel a particular need for a particular type of DM decision to be handled a particular way or they care about the accuracy of certain events not usually thinking about a bigger picture but nit-picking moments. Having been that guy once or twice that's when it happened. Luckily my DM talked to me and I don't do it anymore or at least it is bellow being an issue. I still voice my opinions, but I do it after the game and still enjoy something the DM does that differs from my thought process. It's important to focus on everyone's enjoyment.
I have to say. . .I'm kind of a flavor of the week. . .but that's cause I have gamed for more than 15 years And since I was the only one dming for most of it. . .so now I have so many ideas and I wanna try them out. . . When I have a dm
5:35 SCOTT BROWN MOTHER FUCKA! Get the FUCK out! I've got a showing! Plot twist: The three characters that are preparing for Death itself to come through the door, are actually trying to visit the Scott Brown offices, so they can try to buy a new base of operations. They were doing all of that setup because they've heard of Scott Brown's hard-core reputation, and they're intimidated by it.
In the thirty years I've been DMing, I had come to think I'd seen every possible kind of bad habit a player can fall into. Then, I met this one player. She wanted me to give her a walkthrough of my campaign. As in an actual walkthrough, complete with all the secret areas, tips, tricks, and hints. So she could win it. With the best possible whatever. Score, or points, or reputation, or something. I get that this is a thing with video games, but this obviously isn't a video game, so... yeah. I really didn't know how to react to that. I tried to explain that I couldn't, because while I had some broad ideas, and so forth, I hadn't written the entire campaign, as I wanted to allow for the players to explore, and shape the narrative through their actions. I had some large world events that would happen, again depending on player actions that might change them, but I planned each adventure as we moved through the game. She tried to google my campaign, then got mad when she couldn't find anything on it. I still don't really know how to react to that. She finally quit when I wouldn't reward her for attempting to burn down an orphanage in the middle of the night, killing everyone inside. She thought the orphans would give her enough XP to level ahead of the rest of the party, hence, she was winning. Sometimes, even if you try to talk to players about these kinds of things, they just won't listen.
Man thanks for sharing that. I call it Forecasting when a player tries to essentially reverse railroad and tell the gm what they want to happen, but your example goes beyond that. A player like that is useless though. Might be a nice person but for the purposes of a game group the time and patience required outweigh the benefit
@@valdorhightower I've heard that some terrible players will actually kill and rob npc's too. Can you imagine that! It's disgusting behavior, and surely indicative of some serious mental health issues. /s
I've been a flavor of the week player in the past. I realized i could just GM and play all the characters i need to play as NPCs. I get to do all the voices, subtle flaws and nuances of a character without necessarily having to commit to them long-term. I really love coming up with characters. Now I have my NPCs that I create when I have character ideas, and I have the few I've made to play and stick with. Solved my Flavor of the Week syndrome.
I enjoy both but I can be a player who sits back and lets other players lead so dming actually forces me into the interaction. I am also willing to let players hash things out and I only interupt when the coversation seems to stagnate. So far my players seem happy.
Paranoid player and overly Flawed Player is who I have to put up with. Paranoid players are fine, but during a D&D campaign that required foraging, looting items this one player would not do important raiding. Being a Wizard I'm ok him staying at the back, but he refused to go into any room. He got angry when no one listened to him say the tomb was filled with Wild Magic, yet everyone had nothing bad happen to them. However on the plus side making a Wizard afraid to cast spells is a HUGE cunning move by any DM/GM and that's basically what I did. From a rp perspective it left him uninvolved. He had skills with a bow, but would not engage. I felt if he was that afraid he should have waited outside the Tomb. All he did was stand a door way and not even explore.
@Sean Fisher I've seen a guy play an awakened undead thanksgiving dinner once. He was a chain warlock with a minotaur skeleton familiar, so he lived inside its ribcage and used its senses, casting spells through it. The minotaur was in full plate armor, so none of the other characters knew that he was really a turkey. The closest anyone got to knowing was when my sorcerer caught him in a fireball (the turkey had full cover/concealment inside the armor so only the minotaur took the damage) and heard a slight sizzling noise.
"We should not take the full 31 points of damage from the fireball as one-sixth of my body is under water. The damage should be reduced by one-sixth." "Fine, you take five sixth of the 31 fireball damage as fire damage, and the last one-sixth as scalding damage as the fireball boils the water around you."
"Oh, and you also take 1d4 of scalding damage for, let's see, six rounds, because now you're in a cloud of steam. And you're Blinded, because of said steam. Were you breathing in or out? In? Sucks to be you--add +4 to 1/6 of that 31 points. Hardened leather armor, you say? That's made of wax--which melts, reducing your armor by half. And didn't you say your character had long, flowing hair? Charisma penalty!" The DM I have taught me early on: If you get to pick nits, the DM gets to pick nits. And he is much, much better at it than we players are! (No complaint here; it makes his worlds VERY rich. Never thought of how to handle sewage treatment in a magical world before playing with him!)
@@jamesverhoff1899 The magical chamber pot, teleports the waste to the town's waste storage tank that has green slime in it. Occasionally the clerics cast cure disease to knock the level down;
That's what time management is for. If you're going to do a dungeon crawl then you have to manage time, it's crucial to the experience. Otherwise players have unlimited time to search every hallway and every doorframe, so all the tension and risk is lost. The standard AD&D rate is one random encounter roll every 10 or 20 minutes, and a single search action takes 10 minutes. Either risk a trap that you might not have rolled well enough to spot or risk rolling a random encounter, which could be even more dangerous.
@@crazyeyes8962 I don't typically use random encounters in dungeons, but this makes a lot of sense. It creates a time crunch and pushes them forward. Nice!
I bought some sand timers. When the players are paralyzed, I just pull one out and start timing it. I don’t know what happens when the timer runs out. It has never happened.
In the 90s my players once noticed a copy of "Grimtooth's Traps" on my bookshelf. I had purchased it to read for my own amusement and never intended to use much that was in it, but the mere existence of the book had me dealing with a paranoid party for a good number of weeks afterwards :P
I've been working my way back and adding it to older videos (mostly just cleaning up the auto-captions - adding capitalizations, punctuation, correcting spelling, etc.). So if you come across one that I haven't done the close captioning for yet that you want to watch, just let me know. Newly posted videos might take a day or 2 before I can add it, so whenever I post something new, just hold off watching it for a couple days and it should be available by the time you watch it.
@Jimmy De'Souza Not good. Characters like that don't progress at the same pace as the rest of the party. They start out as completely powerless dead weight and quickly become demigods when they overcome that crippling flaw. And neither is interesting for the rest of the party.
A group of my players got annoyed that a bridge was out in a town and when they were told that it would take a week to repair, rather than contact any of their contacts in the mages guild even the one who specifically used spells to control plant life, they burned the village and all of the villagers down.
A few months ago, I came up with the idea for a handicap mini-campaign where everyone has one super low stat that must be played to in character. Maybe we'll actually get to try it someday. XD
@@commandercaptain4664 I made a blind GURPS character once. I used the Disadvantage points from Blindness to buy Para-Radar. Basically Daredevil as a magic swordsman. Worked pretty well, actually.
@@TheLastGarou I did something similar in AD&D 2nd Edition. I made a blind ronin armed with a zatoichi stick (essentially a katana disguised as a walking stick). I devoted extra skill slots to blind fighting and took keen hearing and keen smell as character traits (we were using the optional books Skills & Powers and Combat & Tactics). Basically I was the main character from Zatoichi: The Blind Swordsman, or a cross between Ogami Itto from Loan Wolf & Cub and Rutger Hauer's character from the movie Blind Fury. Whichever movie you prefer 😉
"An *mimes air quotes* empty room, how fiendish !!! I disbelieve the illusion and await the oncoming storm of death and destruction." "Guys, it's empty ..." "You're trying to lull us into a sense of false security, reverse psychology, don't be fooled, the more he says there is nothing the easier he can strike at us by surprise ... We're not moving, using all our detection spells and alarms, ready to strike when the hidden peril unveils itself." "OK, you sit tight for a week, meanwhile Baron von Strachen got his hands on the King's Sword and took over as absolute ruler." "No, it's a clever distraction from the real threat !" Mubles to himself "Lucky I didn't mention a chair ..."
haha this is practically how we treat one of my friends when they DM best part- they are a "this is my story, you are my protagonists" kind of DM (a.k.a he _wants_ us to succeed) yet we still rarely trust him
@@Konpekikaminari Yeah, it is annoying. I am the same way, of course, I don't help by chuckling evilly and grinning. I bark a lot, but out of all the DMs in our West Marches style game, I am the only one who hasn't actually killed a player yet. They seem to forget that though. :)
@@shadowscall7758 in the end, it's not your kill count or your BS fiats, it's the little things- that evil grin, that well timed "are you sure?", that 4yo girl in the middle of an eerie dungeon (said friend did that, one of us literally got nightmares)
Negotiators... Ugghh. I've had to deal with a fair share of those. It's a good name for them, and it's a very slippery slope to someone becoming one. Great video, Seth. Thanks
As a dm, I would agree and add additional penalties and negative consequences "I'm too skinny." "Cool. You break a bone. Reduce your dex and con by 3 each. Your Condition is now 'bleeding'."
The other name for them back in the day was "rules lawyers." It can be a blessing and a curse. For example there was a wild-west campaign I played once with a new GM (but I knew the players) which was inspired by the Donner party (good article on Wikipedia if you aren't informed). We got stuck in the mountains during a bad snowstorm and we got attacked by a pack of wolves. After fighting them off, one of our most experienced players wanted to track one of them. The exchange went something like this, except this is the EXTREMELY short version: GM: "You can't." Player: "Why not?" GM: "Snow is falling and covers up the tracks." Player: "That's not a good enough reason, it's freshly fallen snow and tracks leave very deep imprints. It would still be trackable." GM: "You can't track them." Player: "Even then, I shot one of the wolves and it's bleeding. I can track the blood." GM: "Nope, can't do it." This went on for a while. It was an awkward situation because me and the other players empathized with the negotiating player and thought he was right, but the argument was so drawn out (and it happened over IRC) that I didn't feel like entering the discussion. It really boiled down to the adventure being poorly written and not thinking about the player wanting to do this, but the GM was for some reason totally reluctant to admit this and ended up quitting over it. I found myself wondering if I wanted to continue playing with that GM afterwards anyway. It also didn't help that we discovered that the combat system for the game we were playing was deeply flawed. The game was Deadlands and it's trivially easy to make a gunslinger character that can shoot an insane amount of times in a single turn without even trying to properly min-max.
Whenever I got to meet paranoid players, it's because they often come from high risk low reward games. Situations when the GM just sets up traps to screw with the characters not giving them any chance but just leaving them to the mercy of the dice. At one point I used to do stuff like that, and specially in Call of Cthulhu, it only breeds paranoia and fear. Which in a certain way is the intended effect, but if not well done and prepared it can spread like weed and screw all your games. You pretty much talked about it in the video reviewing the Corbitt House module, in the greenhouse on the backyard there's this plant that can instantly kill your players, which is an absolute suckerpunch and hate it. I think that the paranod players can be fixed by modifying some behaviours and challenge design. Unless explicitly told that it's an uncharted place filled with traps, try to avoid backstabbing your players with high damage - deadly traps or consequences for the mundane. It's probable that the door to an ancient chamber may have some sort of curse, give indications for your players to take notice of it and give them the chance to overcome it. It should be for the players to decide if they want to take the risk of going through a trapped place rather than telling them it's trapped when it's too late for them to take any stance with it, risking losing their characters. On the other hand, if the trap is something more of a warning with moderate damage, or something that captures them and modifies the situation of an aspect, forcing them to plan around it, efectively moving the story forward, go for it.
There's also plenty to be said about "trapping philosophy"... In game, through the storytelling, rather than give clues like little flags or neon signs about places that are likely to be booby-trapped, I drop hints and rumors or legends about the people who supposedly built the places, or are known to inhabit the areas... In an espionage campaign, for example, you might point out from time to time, "The best traps for these people are not scary, nor are they hidden out of sight. The successful terror campaign ATTRACTS attention so they can hit the highest number of casualties per trap set." Then you follow through... making something obscenely obvious or curiously obnoxious, and stick a high-damage trap inside... SUDDENLY, your PC's all start being really really cautious about the obnoxious and "glittery" things. If it instantly captures their curiosity (like treasure) they'll go about it with forty-foot poles (ten simply isn't enough feet). My point, here, is that an established pattern of thought (paradigm) can be instilled, and so long as it's not constantly undermined, you're Players will find it challenging, but not impossible... And you have a valid point that over-paranoid PC's tend to come from a history of high damage irrecoverable traps... booby or otherwise. SO do murder-hobos. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Murder hobos and GMs loving NPCs that betray people are why my games are extremely betrayal light. I personally don't enjoy betrayal in shows I like to watch or stories I read, so I don't really put it in my games. Usually when someone is an ally or a good guy, they stay that way. Some people might say that is boring, but I love not having to second guess every NPC and my players love it, since it frees them up to think about how to approach a fight without having to worry about what to do when X invariably betrays them. If I run into a party of murder-hobos, ill just make one of the NPCs they attempt to murder a retired level 18 fighter and see how long they stay murder-hobo. :)
@@shadowscall7758 Christ... here we go again... Yes, you read that right. That's exactly what I meant... yet again, I find myself "called out" for a tactic that CAN really make the game more complicated and roughly realistic... BUT not because it's something that I've done wrong... I'm being "called out" because of something YOU have assumed wrong. Look, anything can be overdone... ANYTHING. You might think you're engaged in a fun game, when in fact, it's pathetic and flat and boring... and your friends aren't going to tell you that, because "friends". SO here's the tip. Don't ever over-do it. A betrayal in one campaign that hits at the worst possible moment will suck everyone into the plot... and they'll chatter on about that moment for years. A betrayal as a significant feature in EVERY game... well... that's just as flat and boring as never having a loyal NPC turn the tables... Do you understand where I'm going? I'm not critical of your "Betrayal Light" variation, either... so don't start that crap. AND it IS crap. You're probably doing the mix "about right" from my perspective. It ABSOLUTELY SHOULD be "betrayal light". Like I pointed out above, one betrayal at a pivotal moment can build a scene that will get talked about and retold for decades... If it's your "signature move" however... You're no more inventive than the guy who thinks a villain being an asshole is par for the course. My point has always been, "There are many layers and styles of despicable sons of bitches... switching things up a bit won't kill ya. I promise." Get it? Hope so. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 I wasn't calling you out for anything. I know it can make good stories, I think you read way too much into what I said. I don't enjoy doing betrayals, it is not fun for me, so why should I do it? As for the players, they do enjoy it because I have literally run this starting with random people on the internet. Now, are there players who do want it, yes, but there are a multitude of other ways to make a good story instead of betrayal, you can even have someone betray them, but then the players find out that they were coerced into it and they go to try and rescue the person or something. That is not true betrayal, so I don't count that. Seriously, I wasn't trying to call any one out for anything, I was just giving my opinion on something. I think you need to take a chill pill.
I thought of an idea for a list like this with five good player habits and their toxic counterpart about a week ago the list of habits I had in the list are: The opportunist: plays the game, explores the world, initiates, plans. Talks to the NPCs instead of an NPC crying out for help, barters with the shopkeeper, ventures off the standard path so the DM has to add to their world and it all shows how much the player is involved in and interested in the world the DM has created. Vs Murderhobo: doesn't care about your world as a DM just wants to see what dumb thing they can get away with this time. Needlessly kill NPC, needless theft, needless rapacity and act as though since they are the heroes of the story they can't be punished by anyone or else the dark wizard will have everyone enslaved for a thousand years etc. The Librarian: Knowledge of rules, sources and guides. Readily helps other players or DM if clarity for a stat is needed. May even have a source readily available if needed. Vs. Rules lawyer: NOT someone who advocates or argues on behalf of the rules, instead argues for *an interpretation of said rule*. The DM is judge, a real judge can't just ignore the law, so a DM can't blatantly ignore a rule, BUT they are final say with in that specific game what the rules means. Does an NPC with sentinel get an opportunity attack against a PC with mobile? Or does the PC get away? That is a nuance within the laws of the rules that a DM decides on, not the players. Attentive: the player is there in body and mind. They don't distract. They don't look up dnd roleplayer videos on TH-cam during the session. They are their to play DnD. Vs. Metagamer: uses knowledge of things beyond what a character would know to gain advantage in game. Memorized monster manual to constantly remind the DM how much life it had left. Interrupts conversation between two PCs or two NPCs or a PC and an NPC to have heard everything the whole time because they were there all along just hidden in the shadows and I want attention - Blah! The Peacekeeper: makes sure everyone is having a good time and players no there is no ill intent, helps conflicts to resolve, encourages forgiveness. Just wants a nice fun friendly roleplay session. Vs. Social Paranoid: constantly worries that anything they do or say will upset the DM or the party. Is scared to make a decision even in session zero. Watched lists of bad roleplayer player videos on TH-cam and is convinced they are everyone of them or conversely is worried someone in their party or the DM could be one. The Actor: puts on a show, changes voice, describes what they do with brevity to foster the imagination among the group. In roleplaying they do just that, they play the role while in the party they play their role. Vs. The Novelist/FanFic Writer/Fetishist/Slasher Film Scriptwriter etc. : Needlessly takes up time in play to describe things to minute detail. Takes 5 minutes to do a single action. Overplays an actions details going overly gritty and graphic, if it's blood or semen they will describe where it goes. Controls the narrative the DM has been trying to have through this detail. May even outright still the game to do who on Earth knows what. Refuses to see when the other players have had enough because to them this is their story and they are the main character. A DM with a favored NPC can do just that too. Anyway that is my list and videos like this inspire me to think of it and other ways to be a roleplayer people will enjoy having around.
As a side note: the Sentinel vs. Mobile actually seems like a pretty clear situation (at least RAW). :P Sentinel is specifically said to ignore the Disengage action, while Mobile allows you to ignore opportunity attacks, not take a free Disengage. Thus there's no actual conflict between the two, because Sentinel doesn't do anything to counter Mobile, while Mobile counters a general group of things that include Sentinel.
I'm kind of concerned by how many people are treating the fireball example as if it's an improv prompt to see who can figure out how to most creatively inflict extra damage on the player as some sort of "gotcha!" The very thing Seth warned about with the negotiator is that it can create a "player vs DM" mindset, and trying to screw the player in these instances doesn't defuse that, it reinforces it.
I actually have a hilarious story about a minor (and perfectly acceptable) negotiation situation lol. Our monk was hidden by an illusory barrel in an orc stronghold, and an orc was about to pick up the barrel, so he decided to strike and surprise the orc before it discovered the illusion. He did enough damage with flurry of blows to kill the orc outright, and the DM started to describe the vicious assault... Until one of the other players pointed out, "He's a halfling - there's a height difference." The DM changed his description and noted that the orc got punched in the balls so hard that it coughed them up and died.
Seth, I adore your videos! The RPG Philosophy videos in particular. I love the character skits that you do - the indecisiveness one was particularly funny - crossing out 'Use Orphans' really got me, haha. I would love to be a player in a game you DMed. It would be fascinating to see your game running style in action!
Tangentially related but allowing the characters to hire an NPC hireling or pet is a good idea if they're that indecisive. Just make sure they get a cut of the loot so the players are incentivized to eventually let them go. They will probably increase their confidence as they finally do push through and eventually want to do it by themselves, or maybe they could turn it into a meaningful character arc.
I love the negotiator skit with the fireball. I figure that I'd have instantly agreed with the player and said something to the effect of, "That's right! I've already taken that into account. You only take 5/6th of the damage which is 31 points! The actual damage would have been 37 otherwise." ;)
For me the biggest grief I have both GMing and playing is when people are one step beyond paranoid and being over cautious. I appreciate that character death is always a disappointment but Jesus, but like an old serjeant I had once said: "every battle plan never survives first contact, in most cases a best laid plan loses out to combat flexibility, so when push comes to shove GO BALLS TO THE WALL!"
@@Tony-dh7mz Trust the Computer, the Computer is your friend. If you do not trust the Computer, you will be used as reactor shielding! I loved Paranoia.
One of my players is an overly paranoid player and he knows it so he designed his PCs to also be overly paranoid. It stems from this: it's the PCs vs the GM mindset that he has. He GM'ed 2 games. Both of them extremely short lived and now NO ONE in our group will let him GM again because he has no sense of scale and is out to actually kill PCs.
YOU FOOLS! You forgot to cover the corridor in spikes in case whoever is in the room charges forward when you open the door. Meanwhile at the tower. As you wait outside the tower arguing on if you should knock on the door. It opens a crack, and someone calls here boy. A small dog runs up to the tower and goes inside
Never bring physics into a fantasy game. I've played with people who do that, and so my response would have been: "Oh dang, you're right. I DID forget to take the water into account! Standing in water during a backdraft can cause shock to a body due to the sudden temperature differential, and it would be the same here with the Fireball effect. We'll deal with that once damage is fully calculated. Add to that, magic flames are not affected by mundane weather or elements such as regular water, so the flame would flash-boil the water to steam. So I will need you to take... *rolls dice* 16 more damage with the Burn characteristic. AND the explosive force of air will cause a direct hit on you with no armor, launching you 30ft and leaving me to roll on the Blunt Force critical hit table." So long as it doesn't slow the game, physics can be fun. But, like it says in the video, don't make it happen too often and slow everything down.
Dont forget the oxygen depletion, as well as the resulting smoke in a small sealed underground corridor, so we have to calculate the ongoing exhaustion from oxygen starvation as well as the Coughing status effect for the whole group. oh, before we forget, whats the durability for your equipment?
My argument on that is that most of its damage is going to be hitting your vitals. Whether it hits your arms or legs is irrelevant, it'll still deal 31 damage. Now if you were half covered and took a fireball that would be fair.
@@EpicFailLawlKat yeah.... See also, the reason that shooting your bow at flying enemies or moving in flight in D&D doesn't involve Pythagorean equations. Good point on the half-covered part. D&D has specific rules for cover and "5/6ths cover" isn't a thing.
Tell them your problem first, and if their actions don't change have the players talk to them (as said in the video, sometimes another player complaining is more effective because those types of players may see themselves as 'heroes' for the other players). If the activity continues, instead of just outright kicking them, tell them they should sit out for a game session or two, allow them to come to the session but not actually play and see how the game should be played, teach them what they are doing wrong and help them improve. If that fails, and the players don't want him either, he's gotta go. At this point it should be clear to this person that everyone has a problem with their behavior and they just aren't going to change.
Upon introducing a new campaign, which clearly stated it would begin in the wilderness and remain there for a while, a player created a rogue full of stats and skills that would make him a fantastic city thief. Three sessions in he quit out of boredom.
I have an issue with "Flavour Of The Week", there is a type of player who wants to regularly change their character, not because they're bored or don't want to be invested, but because they're so excited about the game that they want to try every single option and combination there is.
So very true! I had a game going and was trying to run an adventure where the party would explore a ruined tower. Instead of opening the front door they decided to chop their way inside through the outside solid stone wall. It took them a very long time to break through the wall and I decided in that time all the intelligent life that was in the tower left with all their valuable possessions. They basically decided that the party was filled with absolute crazies and were not to be trifled with.
Great video Seth. In relation to excessive negotiators, I play with a DM who has been playing D&D for years and often forgets 5e rules or confuses them with older editions, so he occasionally makes weird rulings, so I'll briefly ask if that's how the rule works. If he realises he's made a mistake then I'll either confirm the correct rule or look it up for him, and if he sticks to his guns I'll let it go and continue on with the session. Most of the time it doesn't have much of an impact even if we don't follow the rules exactly as written and it's not worth starting an argument over inconsequential ruling.
5th can be a little weird at times because it encourages more DM fiat like the older editions of D&D. Such as allowing the fighter to come up with dramatic ideas instead of just "I attack it with my sword."
I have a bad case of putting way too many flaws on a character. I only do emotional flaws, though. Physical flaws seem like they'd get really obnoxious beyond 1 or 2.
nothing drives me crazier than an indesisive player. as a PC id just say screw it knock on the door after the first 10 minutes of the party debating mundane nonsense but as a GM it is incredibly fruatrating.
Your comedic bits are great! There are a lot of people on TH-cam that try to be funny and fail almost every opportunity with some just being flat out irritating but you make me laugh. And thanks for the GM/Player advice / introspective videos. Out of everything, I find these to be the most useful. Keep up the good work!
Players that are overly commited to their characters. They seem to dive so deep into it that it becomes a problem, talking about it endelessly even out of game context.
Tick tick Stick a bomb under their collective asses, Make something time dependent, give them a moment, then count down, If they do nothing, the character do nothing, Boom
I've rarely (if ever) seen the Players react indecisively when a large, decorative hourglass is brought into view, and turned to "start the timer"... It's one of my favorite subtle means of disturbing action out of the indecisive... mixed with a fiendish grin, it nearly always gets results... ...admittedly, not always the kind of results you're looking for, or have planned around... BUT in a critical level of indecision, anything is more than nothing. ;o)
@@Tony-dh7mz, literally and legitimately ANY specific tactic brought to the table too often can come across as bullying... AND the hourglass, on its own does nothing... Even with my fiendish expression, it's just in view... sitting quietly nearby. The Players' Minds, however, tend to start moving... SO properly employed (just from time to time) it can be very subtle... As you also suggested, "tick tock"... so what's NOT bullying about putting a bomb into the game? That's an outright declaration "move or die". I am a bit more devilish and tactful. I've often pulled out the hourglass, noting that Players are busier "quibbling over details" than I'd like, only to fumble for the small box of candy-bars or similar such underneath it, and "absently" leaving the hourglass sitting while I get my chocolate fix... or just another soda. The fact that psychological "prodding" was employed never has to leave the lips of a good GM... SO subtlety is just as much about HOW you do something as it is about WHAT you do... Glad you brought that up. ;o)
It’s not subtle, it’s blatant, and once it because systematic it becomes a constant pressure, that’s not good, the hour glass becomes associated with the same gimmick, and no, not every “tactic” brought to the table is bullying, tick tock is a trick to push their initiative, and not to constantly batter them, A subtle is to use it sparingly, Blatantly is when it becomes a predictable element within the game, You can’t get more blatant with an hourglass, use this too much and it’s abusive,
Ive had the overly cautious party literally say out loud, in front of me, with their actual words, oog, not in character... "keep the GM talking, if hes still talking then he still has information that we need to solve the encounter." they really didnt think i would just filibuster descriptions off the cuff while they procrastinate. they really thought some mundane descriptive words meant that i was JUST getting to the ultimate betrayal plot, and i would somehow slip my tongue, and oops tell them my master plans. like... it is bold to assume i HAVE a master plan... i just want to talk about fantasy worlds guys... they're neat ok. I have fun by talking about them, im not trying to conceal something, and im not going to accidentally flub it. I worked full time as a gm in an escape room and people ALWAYS assumed that i f***ing wake up every morning, put on my clown make up, drink 7 cups of coffee JUST to lie to strangers who paid to have a fun game. like... that is not my life ambition Karen
As a fairly new DM, I appreciate when my players let me know of a rule I’m forgetting that can change how the scenario pans out (especially in combat since that has the most to juggle and the highest stakes) but PLEASE don’t argue with me about every little thing, especially if it’s in a homebrew campaign and we’re basically breaking the rules as a collective group already
We have a flavor of the week guy at my table. Because of this, my character always ends up becoming the focus of any campaign. While it is a boost to my ego, I just don't want to be the center of attention all the time. One good side effect was one of his characters became a demigod and added a ridiculous rp session for my character. God fire is not good for the completion.
You must be a mind reader. I have a player that fits all these categories, and its starting to spreading to the others. I'm going to recommend they watch your series. #KeepADnDAlive
I'm not going to lie, Captain Grimbo actually sounds like a really fun character to play. Like, I'm imagining a brain in a jar with a speaker and and some kind of analog for eyes, be that a camera, or whatever. Most of the time he acts as the ship's AI pilot, but when the characters leave the ship, they take him with in a backpack or something, because he has all this experience dealing with the seedy criminal underground, and the other player characters are a bunch of goody two shoes, so Captain grimbo has to help them navigate whatever situations they might get themselves into. Maybe he can also hack computers, so he can get them past security systems and things like that. Sure, he's absolutely useless in a fight, but his wealth of experience more than makes up for it. Honestly, I think Todd was on to something there
Actually if cool bro had gone with an interface and spider legs then the brawling and piloting would have been rad ya know? The speech is a weird choice though... even if he was quite a talker, I have a hard time believing a brain in a jar could persuade me of anything. Unless it's the one from D&D I suppose haha
The addicted to flaws one hit home immediately, first time I ever ran my friend who used to be the forever dm gave this off hard. For explanation I was doing an epic fantasy game of pathfinder with point buy, and he was asking to have the point value of like 10-15 less points than anyone else just because he felt it would be more interesting. He was also at one point in another game a magus with no points in use magic device which is what magus’ revolve around
Only once has a flaw addict improved my game.. they chose am blind alcoholic ranger and argued for a hamster animal companion for some dumb reason. The whole party ended up TPK'd in a fight against a white dragon, except the hamster who got a Nat 20 save. The party had managed to get the dragon down to one final HP so it was going to be called a good fight by the group, until the flaw addict decided their hamster would attack out of revenge. That revenge managed to hit for 1 point of dmg, slaying the dragon and spurring a legend to be born. That hamster went on to rule the kingdom they saved, and to this day I have kept that lineage intact in my campaign world because it baffles new players, is hilarious, and reminds some of the returning players of that fateful day almost 15 years ago. Needless to say the flaw addict has not returned because I refused to allow them to play the hamster in the next game, because a deaf, drug addicted hamster is too far.. even for me, the DM who has a hamster monarchy.
Great video, Seth! Would like to add on the part of "becoming a crutch" for the indecisive, though. A couple good tactics mix together (in my experience) to avoid that. Part 1, don't always just give a "gentle push" for the action, and don't always make a "right answer" the obvious choice. Send them down rabbit holes, waste a bunch of their effort on useless goofing around, and occasionally GET THEM INJURED... As a GM, taking the action lead, is not what I'm supposed to be doing when I've clearly given the PC's agency with the story. Being forced to take that agency back, doesn't equal the Players getting where they wanted to go... simple as that. SO they grind to a halt for inaction, and maybe I animate the tower to eat someone... random choice, PC or NPC... (no typo's there either... I meant that) OR maybe instead of a group of tinkergnomes, who's inventions have been leading the locals to gossip about it being haunted... turn out to be a family (pack) of werewolves, completely without warning. The moon's rising, so figure it out or die. Part 2. ACTUALLY discuss why consequences for inaction are a less than savory mixed bag... Point out that Player ACTION gets rewards, including things like minimizing damage for "chutzpah" levels of creative thinking... advantage where rolls might be "plain" or a lack of disadvantage when Canon prescribes it, simply because "it's just crazy enough they'd never in hell expect that." BUT point out specifically, that I as GM actually WANT the Players to take up agency when it's handed out. I'm not there to be in control, so giving the control back to me is about as much fun as writing a novel (which is a dragging-ass kind of bore and frankly TOO damn much work). AND finally, there's no substitute for "the big freakin' hourglass"... If you can't find one in a gothic looking antique store, BUILD it... It should be over-sized, with a decorative "carved wood" look to it. Hand-built (your own) means you can even access the thing to change the amount of sand inside (changing time limits at will) as well as the COLOR of sand used (always a good accent to play with). At my table, even the most Paranoid Indecisive Paralysis is nearly INSTANTLY cured at the sight of my two-foot tall hourglass even being in view... Should it land on the table, there's ACTION or hell to play! ...and just for the record, I advocate being UNAFRAID to get "a little cavalier" with the rules, regarding rewarding "good" Player behavior. ;o)
What I probably hate the most as a DM are players who not only negotiate and argue but also dictate how you should run the encounter. Everybody says D&D is a game where everyone should be having fun, but some forget to include the DM.
My two cents: #5. RPGs are a group activity. Players are required to create characters who want to adventure with the party and whom the party would want adventuring with them. Flaws and weaknesses are great, but there should be something the character is _good_ at too - some reason the other PCs would be willing to tolerate or overlook the character's flaws - otherwise you're basically making the other players RP their characters as morons. #4. Save it for the other side of the screen. #3 & 2. When my old DM can play in my D&D campaign, his PC is deliberately the opposite to this precisely because a couple decades of running games have left him with a deep hatred of time wasting. If the party discovers a locked chest, the others have around three seconds to start things moving or his PC is just going to start hitting the thing. Unless another player _tells_ him to wait, he's moving forward. #1. This is not a good habit gone bad. It's just a bad habit.
Negotiating with the DM isn't a bad habit if you do it tactfully. Here's an example of it being done well. Me and my group are fighting Rust Monsters. Me being the Paladin and the only one actually carrying metal armor and weapons was being focused by them almost entirely. After 'realizing' in character what they were I argued to my DM that I could reasonably keep them focused on things within reach or guard against them hitting my armor. So I describe how I'm using my shield and a spare mace I have to keep them at arms length. Every time I failed a save I kept it to my shield and mace. I lost the shield and the mace became useless, but my shiny armor was safe and my main weapon was fine.
@@PrinceSilvermane I think the example you gave is a great instance of coming up with a creative plan and working with your DM to make it happen. But constantly second-guessing rulings is crap.
I find that the best way to deal with an indecisive player is to invite an impatient player to the party, who gets bored of the indecision and makes the decision for them
I would add: a player that overly role-playing his character (you know, the kind of talking and acting like he is the character itself) For example - a fanatic Paladin: at first the other players won't mind someone like that, but later on, having to sit with someone that only talks about "purging darkness with the holy" like it's the only subject worth talking about - can get extremely irritating and annoying. Furthermore - their stubbornness to stick to the character's personality, can sometimes even hinder the group; for example from one of my past games (which also included an overly role-playing Paladin) - we were stuck in a maze inside a large a dungeon, until we encountered two undead guys who agreed to help us out if we will release them from their eternal torment. After going out of the maze, we thought we could convince them to help us a little more against future obstacles, but our Paladin, without any discussion or even warning - just used his holy mojo ("By the holy...") and released them.
13:10 they can (emphasis) mention it. Mention it. Then drop it. Remember in critical role when Travis asked Matt a question about the blinded enemy throwing a spear at him in the dark in between two other enemy npcs? Travis asked a question, Matt answered, and Travis just went "ok. Fair enough." He mentioned it, and then he accepted Matt's answer.
I made a blind fighter once in Pathfinder and made sure to discuss it with my party before game started so that it wasnt going to make it too difficult for them. Personally, I love having a hard time in tabletop games. After 4 sessions the group asked me to change characters because a blind fighter really wasnt pulling his weight so I said I would look at changing them between sessions. The DM ended up helping me come up with a way to compromise so I respected their opinions and made a couple adjustments with the level ups and swapped out all the feats I had picked up and grabbed the blind sense feats to allow me to be blind but able to fight effectively. After the campaign ended I was voted the most valuable member because I was willing to adjust my character to help the party be better as a whole.
Hey Seth! I’ve got a weird question for you. (Or anyone else who could help.) I’m DMing my first continuous campaign right now, and I have 4 players. They are apart of another campaign that I’m a PC in. However, one of MY players is the DM from that campaign. Lately he’s been correcting every small mistake I make and using his existing knowledge of DnD 5e to just steamroll my combat sessions. Any idea how I should handle the situation? I understand that having prior knowledge isn’t something you can just forget about, but pointing out weaknesses and resistances during fights kind of ruins the surprise. None of the other players really want to stop him from revealing info because he’s their DM in another campaign.
That's something you'll need to talk to him about. 99% of the time, people who do that are doing it with good intentions, believing that they're helping you. The problem is that they're accidentally undermining you and hurting your ability to run and your authority with the other players. People who normally GM can be terrible about that. Explain that one of the first rules of the game is the GM has final say. If you're running, then they should keep their moth shut. If you need help, you can ask. After the game he can talk to you and offer pointers, but during the game he needs to let go of the reins and let you run. He probably has no idea it's a problem. A lot of players become intimidated out from even running a game because of the fear that their normal GM will judge or call them out on any mistakes. Any GM should be happy when a player steps up and takes the driver seat and lets them actually play from time to time.
Randy Myer I had flaws backfire bad in GURPS once, but I figure it’s the GM’s fault for not stopping me during session 0 and saying, “I don’t want to give anything away, but trust me. This concept won’t work for my campaign.” Long story short: He billed it as a superhero-type game, and wanted us to make a superhero group comprised of “best-of-the-best” type characters with no powers (Black Widow/Zangief/Leverage types.) I opted to be the money. I took a variety of flaws, most notable of which was a CRIPPLING cocaine addiction, in order to afford having just, like, a gajillion dollars. I had henchmen and toys and the ability to grease whatever kind of wheels, etc. It seemed like a fun and interesting concept, but the GM should’ve told me about the bait-and-switch. First mission we fell into the real campaign headfirst, which turned out to be a time-and-dimension-hopping “Sliders” sort of ordeal, but without the parallel universe aspect. Immediately, my character had no toys, no money, no henchmen, and no access to his substance. Needless to say he was worse than useless, no fun to play, and a burden to the entire party at that point (what with having lost all his advantages, and an absolute truckload of negatives combined with a near total inability to focus on the situation at hand, both stemming from his extraordinarily severe withdrawal.) One of my worst experiences as a player, and totally avoidable.
I once mastered a small 2-player Shadowrun table. It has some really nice and memorable moments in it I gladly think back to. Allthough that paranoia-problem was rampant. So much that in a (admittedly not a beginner-job) job extracting some scientist from a facility in cuba it took two or three evenings just to figure out _how to travel to Cuba_. And don't get me wrong - my players were excited enough to even phone me between games about their plans. However as live got on and things like studies came in the way the group dissolved - and we never made it to Cuba...
Robert Nett Shadowrun is really a game that lends itself to paranoia. I‘m currently playing Shadowrun 5 and enjoy quite the unhealthy dose of paranoia. It’s ok for SR5, but I hope I don’t stay as paranoid in other games.
Thanks for the RPG Philosophy videos Seth. I originally watch these videos to see if I could recognize them in other people, but I end up seeing myself in some of the personalities and it has helped me become a better player in the way of recognizing my own flaws. Again, thanks for the videos Seth.
The helpful players who can point to rules I think of as Rules Sages (aka The Librarian). Those are handy to have and should be given way more credit as good players. Rules Lawyers are more about trying to exploit and get away with things, using the rules as a means to get away with something outside the spirit of the game. And despite popular belief, Rules Lawyers don't necessarily know the rules, as much as they're confident in their argument.
ohhh lord i am the flavour of the week character..... i dont know what to do about it. I just get to play so seldomly, and i get so easily intruiged by new characters.
I would like to add one extra player sin to this and that is a hoarder because it starts of well enough with wanting some good gear but this player soon starts taking and having everything even if the item doesn't suit their class or is even ideal and tailored for another player. I love your videos Seth and I love Todd
I noticed that I often start being the negotiator when in bad games, that or it's a really stingy GM. [Which is also a really bad GM type. i.e. Player vs Game Master] By that first thing, I mean like 3~ hours into a game that I've been bored for like the last 1-2 hours, I'll start arguing, and correcting them, and this and that. [Take note I've also fallen asleep in some boring games before] Also this normally only happens in 1 shots, and my first time gaming with these people. (Maybe next I'll just drop out in the middle of the game)
I'll back a Kickstarter for a full-length movie starring Seth... and *only* Seth
Ill pay for the fat suit becuase i already know we need one!!!
what about a skinny suit? @@robertbogan225
@@Thetb93 We can fix that in post production but i doubt itd be a problem
No. Staring Jack. He is much cooler than Seth
@@Thetb93 skinny *dip suit
That paranoid player makes me think about why mage hand is my favourite dnd cantrip.
I have a bad habit of touching things when the entire party is indecisive about making a choice.
6:47 In Tomb of Horrors these loons would be the only characters still alive! I mean the real Tomb of Horrors, not the new Tomb of Mild Dread.
I think sometimes with the negotiator type attitude it is often about how they feel about the subject matter. They feel a particular need for a particular type of DM decision to be handled a particular way or they care about the accuracy of certain events not usually thinking about a bigger picture but nit-picking moments. Having been that guy once or twice that's when it happened. Luckily my DM talked to me and I don't do it anymore or at least it is bellow being an issue. I still voice my opinions, but I do it after the game and still enjoy something the DM does that differs from my thought process. It's important to focus on everyone's enjoyment.
Thank you so much for those videos!
All of my players are super paranoid. It takes like a hour to get through every damn room. I rarely even set any traps.
I am definitely 2... I love making characters. Kinda my thing
My own ‘good’ habits that I know I take too seriously so they become detrimental are compulsive note taking and playing on mute because
I have to say. . .I'm kind of a flavor of the week. . .but that's cause I have gamed for more than 15 years
And since I was the only one dming for most of it. . .so now I have so many ideas and I wanna try them out. . . When I have a dm
Is there anything about "lime light hogger"?
I covered 2 different types in this vid. "The Steamroller" or "The Puppetmaster," is what I called them. th-cam.com/video/qyB2-ZD_QAo/w-d-xo.html
5:35
SCOTT BROWN MOTHER FUCKA!
Get the FUCK out!
I've got a showing!
Plot twist: The three characters that are preparing for Death itself to come through the door, are actually trying to visit the Scott Brown offices, so they can try to buy a new base of operations.
They were doing all of that setup because they've heard of Scott Brown's hard-core reputation, and they're intimidated by it.
In the thirty years I've been DMing, I had come to think I'd seen every possible kind of bad habit a player can fall into. Then, I met this one player. She wanted me to give her a walkthrough of my campaign.
As in an actual walkthrough, complete with all the secret areas, tips, tricks, and hints. So she could win it. With the best possible whatever. Score, or points, or reputation, or something. I get that this is a thing with video games, but this obviously isn't a video game, so... yeah.
I really didn't know how to react to that. I tried to explain that I couldn't, because while I had some broad ideas, and so forth, I hadn't written the entire campaign, as I wanted to allow for the players to explore, and shape the narrative through their actions. I had some large world events that would happen, again depending on player actions that might change them, but I planned each adventure as we moved through the game.
She tried to google my campaign, then got mad when she couldn't find anything on it.
I still don't really know how to react to that.
She finally quit when I wouldn't reward her for attempting to burn down an orphanage in the middle of the night, killing everyone inside. She thought the orphans would give her enough XP to level ahead of the rest of the party, hence, she was winning.
Sometimes, even if you try to talk to players about these kinds of things, they just won't listen.
Man thanks for sharing that. I call it Forecasting when a player tries to essentially reverse railroad and tell the gm what they want to happen, but your example goes beyond that. A player like that is useless though. Might be a nice person but for the purposes of a game group the time and patience required outweigh the benefit
Did you ever notice that some players will commit acts in a campaign that they would never think of doing in real life (hopefully).
@@valdorhightower i mean. i can play a CE character, and i am not in any way that kind of person
@@valdorhightower I've heard that some terrible players will actually kill and rob npc's too. Can you imagine that! It's disgusting behavior, and surely indicative of some serious mental health issues.
/s
@@valdorhightower You mean like going out and killing monsters? Because I don't make a living fighting rabid bears and maneating crocodiles.
I've been a flavor of the week player in the past. I realized i could just GM and play all the characters i need to play as NPCs. I get to do all the voices, subtle flaws and nuances of a character without necessarily having to commit to them long-term.
I really love coming up with characters. Now I have my NPCs that I create when I have character ideas, and I have the few I've made to play and stick with. Solved my Flavor of the Week syndrome.
You sound like a good GM,
You found your niche,
I enjoy both but I can be a player who sits back and lets other players lead so dming actually forces me into the interaction. I am also willing to let players hash things out and I only interupt when the coversation seems to stagnate. So far my players seem happy.
I've had this problem too I should try that
Another option is to play npcs for the GM, If you don't want to become a GM
Paranoid player and overly Flawed Player is who I have to put up with.
Paranoid players are fine, but during a D&D campaign that required foraging, looting items this one player would not do important raiding. Being a Wizard I'm ok him staying at the back, but he refused to go into any room.
He got angry when no one listened to him say the tomb was filled with Wild Magic, yet everyone had nothing bad happen to them.
However on the plus side making a Wizard afraid to cast spells is a HUGE cunning move by any DM/GM and that's basically what I did.
From a rp perspective it left him uninvolved. He had skills with a bow, but would not engage. I felt if he was that afraid he should have waited outside the Tomb. All he did was stand a door way and not even explore.
Brain in a jar with high points in seduction.
Yes.
"Is that a new jar, it looks really good on you,"
I'm getting a strong _FalloutNV: Old World Blues_ vibe from that idea.
@Sean Fisher I've seen a guy play an awakened undead thanksgiving dinner once. He was a chain warlock with a minotaur skeleton familiar, so he lived inside its ribcage and used its senses, casting spells through it. The minotaur was in full plate armor, so none of the other characters knew that he was really a turkey. The closest anyone got to knowing was when my sorcerer caught him in a fireball (the turkey had full cover/concealment inside the armor so only the minotaur took the damage) and heard a slight sizzling noise.
@@tyleremery7088 Dear Sir, that idea and description were really hilarious! Please bring my compliments to your roleplaying mate!
"Are you... are you coming on to me?! Sweet Lord, I don't even have the words for how repugnantly wrong that is!"
-Courier Six's Brain
"The black knight is a well rounded character" I see what you did there.
Well he can bite people knees off
Just use him as a battering ram
Gotta chip off those rough edges... Like arms and legs...
I thought that, too! xD
"We should not take the full 31 points of damage from the fireball as one-sixth of my body is under water. The damage should be reduced by one-sixth."
"Fine, you take five sixth of the 31 fireball damage as fire damage, and the last one-sixth as scalding damage as the fireball boils the water around you."
I'd go ok 30 from the fireball+1d12 from boiling water
kalajel “but what you didn’t realize is the mage dumped a barrel of oil on the water and so you take an extra 4d6 damage from the flaming oil”
"Oh, and you also take 1d4 of scalding damage for, let's see, six rounds, because now you're in a cloud of steam. And you're Blinded, because of said steam. Were you breathing in or out? In? Sucks to be you--add +4 to 1/6 of that 31 points. Hardened leather armor, you say? That's made of wax--which melts, reducing your armor by half. And didn't you say your character had long, flowing hair? Charisma penalty!"
The DM I have taught me early on: If you get to pick nits, the DM gets to pick nits. And he is much, much better at it than we players are! (No complaint here; it makes his worlds VERY rich. Never thought of how to handle sewage treatment in a magical world before playing with him!)
@@jamesverhoff1899
The magical chamber pot, teleports the waste to the town's waste storage tank that has green slime in it.
Occasionally the clerics cast cure disease to knock the level down;
you take 100d6 of STFU damage for slowing the goddamn game down. Now go home KAREN! NO ONE WANTED YOU HERE!
You put ONE mimic or ONE trap in a hallway in a game, and now everyone is crawling through each dungeon.
That's what time management is for. If you're going to do a dungeon crawl then you have to manage time, it's crucial to the experience. Otherwise players have unlimited time to search every hallway and every doorframe, so all the tension and risk is lost. The standard AD&D rate is one random encounter roll every 10 or 20 minutes, and a single search action takes 10 minutes. Either risk a trap that you might not have rolled well enough to spot or risk rolling a random encounter, which could be even more dangerous.
That's why it's called dungeon crawling
Always bring a collapsible ten foot pole to poke treasure chests, also dead bodies make great door stops and can be used to set off traps.
@@benbailey3106 Damn, you beat me to it!
@@crazyeyes8962 I don't typically use random encounters in dungeons, but this makes a lot of sense. It creates a time crunch and pushes them forward. Nice!
I bought some sand timers. When the players are paralyzed, I just pull one out and start timing it. I don’t know what happens when the timer runs out. It has never happened.
I got a 30-second sand timer, and even when I was at my maximum, 8 players, same thing. A decision is made.
Lance Clemings thank you for this
i love it
Bringing mine next game.
So in this situation the "bad decision" becomes not acting quick enough so taking the also equally unknown options become more viable.
That "options" montage was priceless! :)
Tactical orphans should be used in every scenario.
"Burn it" is always on the options list for any decision my group needs to make.
"Call Jeff"... now, there's a story behind that one!
use orphans made me laugh
"Use orphans" should always be an option.
In the 90s my players once noticed a copy of "Grimtooth's Traps" on my bookshelf. I had purchased it to read for my own amusement and never intended to use much that was in it, but the mere existence of the book had me dealing with a paranoid party for a good number of weeks afterwards :P
Many thanks for having actual closed captions. Your channel has moved ahead of much other RPG viewing for me for that alone!
I've been working my way back and adding it to older videos (mostly just cleaning up the auto-captions - adding capitalizations, punctuation, correcting spelling, etc.). So if you come across one that I haven't done the close captioning for yet that you want to watch, just let me know. Newly posted videos might take a day or 2 before I can add it, so whenever I post something new, just hold off watching it for a couple days and it should be available by the time you watch it.
Good flaw: the sniper who is addicted to drugs that slow their perception of time.
Bad flaws: The brain who used to be good at seduction and brawling.
Good flaw; gnome with PTSD triggered by the phrase "I trust you implicitly"
@Jimmy De'Souza Not good. Characters like that don't progress at the same pace as the rest of the party. They start out as completely powerless dead weight and quickly become demigods when they overcome that crippling flaw. And neither is interesting for the rest of the party.
Going to play DnD for the first time this sunday hope this will be helpfull
Have fun.
Play the Black Knight after the duel!
One of us, One of us,
Welcome to the Nerd's Guild
Let's us know
I can't count the number of times BURN IT ! has been a legitimately discussed option at my table.
Vagenlitefoot We have a saying at our table: plan B is for bombing it away, so we always have a plan B. But BURN IT! sounds also like a solid plan B.
Burn it is always an option.
Kill it with fire is always an option. In my current pathfinder group it even has a name. We call it Operation Munich.
A group of my players got annoyed that a bridge was out in a town and when they were told that it would take a week to repair, rather than contact any of their contacts in the mages guild even the one who specifically used spells to control plant life, they burned the village and all of the villagers down.
Fire burns clean. 🔥 😊 🔥
Remember when flaws first became a big thing in RPGs? Lots of blind, agoraphobic, quadriplegic heroes in the late 90s 😂
KayleeBrowncoat
When an arrow to the knee didn't end your adventuring carreer.
Late 80s. GURPS was the pioneer of this.
A few months ago, I came up with the idea for a handicap mini-campaign where everyone has one super low stat that must be played to in character. Maybe we'll actually get to try it someday. XD
@@commandercaptain4664 I made a blind GURPS character once. I used the Disadvantage points from Blindness to buy Para-Radar. Basically Daredevil as a magic swordsman. Worked pretty well, actually.
@@TheLastGarou I did something similar in AD&D 2nd Edition. I made a blind ronin armed with a zatoichi stick (essentially a katana disguised as a walking stick). I devoted extra skill slots to blind fighting and took keen hearing and keen smell as character traits (we were using the optional books Skills & Powers and Combat & Tactics). Basically I was the main character from Zatoichi: The Blind Swordsman, or a cross between Ogami Itto from Loan Wolf & Cub and Rutger Hauer's character from the movie Blind Fury. Whichever movie you prefer 😉
"An *mimes air quotes* empty room, how fiendish !!! I disbelieve the illusion and await the oncoming storm of death and destruction."
"Guys, it's empty ..."
"You're trying to lull us into a sense of false security, reverse psychology, don't be fooled, the more he says there is nothing the easier he can strike at us by surprise ... We're not moving, using all our detection spells and alarms, ready to strike when the hidden peril unveils itself."
"OK, you sit tight for a week, meanwhile Baron von Strachen got his hands on the King's Sword and took over as absolute ruler."
"No, it's a clever distraction from the real threat !"
Mubles to himself "Lucky I didn't mention a chair ..."
The chair of conspiratorial ruminations!
Nice try, mutant commie traitor!
haha this is practically how we treat one of my friends when they DM
best part- they are a "this is my story, you are my protagonists" kind of DM (a.k.a he _wants_ us to succeed) yet we still rarely trust him
@@Konpekikaminari Yeah, it is annoying. I am the same way, of course, I don't help by chuckling evilly and grinning. I bark a lot, but out of all the DMs in our West Marches style game, I am the only one who hasn't actually killed a player yet. They seem to forget that though. :)
@@shadowscall7758 in the end, it's not your kill count or your BS fiats, it's the little things- that evil grin, that well timed "are you sure?", that 4yo girl in the middle of an eerie dungeon (said friend did that, one of us literally got nightmares)
In most campaigns the other players would handle the overly flawed character. I could see my players gambling the brain in a jar away in a card game.
So I wasn't the only one who immediately had that idea. I mean, how's he want to defend himself? Think bad thoughts at me?
Negotiators... Ugghh. I've had to deal with a fair share of those. It's a good name for them, and it's a very slippery slope to someone becoming one. Great video, Seth. Thanks
As a dm, I would agree and add additional penalties and negative consequences "I'm too skinny."
"Cool. You break a bone. Reduce your dex and con by 3 each. Your Condition is now 'bleeding'."
12:19. "the fire ball causes the water to boil and you take an additional 3d12 of scald damage."
Negatiotares also hold the other players time up. It is also inconsiderate
The other name for them back in the day was "rules lawyers." It can be a blessing and a curse. For example there was a wild-west campaign I played once with a new GM (but I knew the players) which was inspired by the Donner party (good article on Wikipedia if you aren't informed). We got stuck in the mountains during a bad snowstorm and we got attacked by a pack of wolves. After fighting them off, one of our most experienced players wanted to track one of them. The exchange went something like this, except this is the EXTREMELY short version:
GM: "You can't."
Player: "Why not?"
GM: "Snow is falling and covers up the tracks."
Player: "That's not a good enough reason, it's freshly fallen snow and tracks leave very deep imprints. It would still be trackable."
GM: "You can't track them."
Player: "Even then, I shot one of the wolves and it's bleeding. I can track the blood."
GM: "Nope, can't do it."
This went on for a while. It was an awkward situation because me and the other players empathized with the negotiating player and thought he was right, but the argument was so drawn out (and it happened over IRC) that I didn't feel like entering the discussion. It really boiled down to the adventure being poorly written and not thinking about the player wanting to do this, but the GM was for some reason totally reluctant to admit this and ended up quitting over it. I found myself wondering if I wanted to continue playing with that GM afterwards anyway. It also didn't help that we discovered that the combat system for the game we were playing was deeply flawed. The game was Deadlands and it's trivially easy to make a gunslinger character that can shoot an insane amount of times in a single turn without even trying to properly min-max.
Whenever I got to meet paranoid players, it's because they often come from high risk low reward games. Situations when the GM just sets up traps to screw with the characters not giving them any chance but just leaving them to the mercy of the dice.
At one point I used to do stuff like that, and specially in Call of Cthulhu, it only breeds paranoia and fear. Which in a certain way is the intended effect, but if not well done and prepared it can spread like weed and screw all your games. You pretty much talked about it in the video reviewing the Corbitt House module, in the greenhouse on the backyard there's this plant that can instantly kill your players, which is an absolute suckerpunch and hate it.
I think that the paranod players can be fixed by modifying some behaviours and challenge design. Unless explicitly told that it's an uncharted place filled with traps, try to avoid backstabbing your players with high damage - deadly traps or consequences for the mundane. It's probable that the door to an ancient chamber may have some sort of curse, give indications for your players to take notice of it and give them the chance to overcome it.
It should be for the players to decide if they want to take the risk of going through a trapped place rather than telling them it's trapped when it's too late for them to take any stance with it, risking losing their characters. On the other hand, if the trap is something more of a warning with moderate damage, or something that captures them and modifies the situation of an aspect, forcing them to plan around it, efectively moving the story forward, go for it.
Great advice!!
Might have to give that a try myself.
There's also plenty to be said about "trapping philosophy"...
In game, through the storytelling, rather than give clues like little flags or neon signs about places that are likely to be booby-trapped, I drop hints and rumors or legends about the people who supposedly built the places, or are known to inhabit the areas...
In an espionage campaign, for example, you might point out from time to time, "The best traps for these people are not scary, nor are they hidden out of sight. The successful terror campaign ATTRACTS attention so they can hit the highest number of casualties per trap set."
Then you follow through... making something obscenely obvious or curiously obnoxious, and stick a high-damage trap inside...
SUDDENLY, your PC's all start being really really cautious about the obnoxious and "glittery" things. If it instantly captures their curiosity (like treasure) they'll go about it with forty-foot poles (ten simply isn't enough feet).
My point, here, is that an established pattern of thought (paradigm) can be instilled, and so long as it's not constantly undermined, you're Players will find it challenging, but not impossible... And you have a valid point that over-paranoid PC's tend to come from a history of high damage irrecoverable traps... booby or otherwise.
SO do murder-hobos. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Murder hobos and GMs loving NPCs that betray people are why my games are extremely betrayal light. I personally don't enjoy betrayal in shows I like to watch or stories I read, so I don't really put it in my games. Usually when someone is an ally or a good guy, they stay that way. Some people might say that is boring, but I love not having to second guess every NPC and my players love it, since it frees them up to think about how to approach a fight without having to worry about what to do when X invariably betrays them.
If I run into a party of murder-hobos, ill just make one of the NPCs they attempt to murder a retired level 18 fighter and see how long they stay murder-hobo. :)
@@shadowscall7758 Christ... here we go again...
Yes, you read that right. That's exactly what I meant... yet again, I find myself "called out" for a tactic that CAN really make the game more complicated and roughly realistic... BUT not because it's something that I've done wrong... I'm being "called out" because of something YOU have assumed wrong.
Look, anything can be overdone... ANYTHING. You might think you're engaged in a fun game, when in fact, it's pathetic and flat and boring... and your friends aren't going to tell you that, because "friends".
SO here's the tip. Don't ever over-do it. A betrayal in one campaign that hits at the worst possible moment will suck everyone into the plot... and they'll chatter on about that moment for years.
A betrayal as a significant feature in EVERY game... well... that's just as flat and boring as never having a loyal NPC turn the tables...
Do you understand where I'm going? I'm not critical of your "Betrayal Light" variation, either... so don't start that crap. AND it IS crap. You're probably doing the mix "about right" from my perspective. It ABSOLUTELY SHOULD be "betrayal light". Like I pointed out above, one betrayal at a pivotal moment can build a scene that will get talked about and retold for decades... If it's your "signature move" however... You're no more inventive than the guy who thinks a villain being an asshole is par for the course.
My point has always been, "There are many layers and styles of despicable sons of bitches... switching things up a bit won't kill ya. I promise."
Get it? Hope so. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 I wasn't calling you out for anything. I know it can make good stories, I think you read way too much into what I said. I don't enjoy doing betrayals, it is not fun for me, so why should I do it? As for the players, they do enjoy it because I have literally run this starting with random people on the internet. Now, are there players who do want it, yes, but there are a multitude of other ways to make a good story instead of betrayal, you can even have someone betray them, but then the players find out that they were coerced into it and they go to try and rescue the person or something. That is not true betrayal, so I don't count that.
Seriously, I wasn't trying to call any one out for anything, I was just giving my opinion on something. I think you need to take a chill pill.
"Advice on how to play a blind character" pops up on reddit almost every day lol
I thought of an idea for a list like this with five good player habits and their toxic counterpart about a week ago the list of habits I had in the list are:
The opportunist: plays the game, explores the world, initiates, plans. Talks to the NPCs instead of an NPC crying out for help, barters with the shopkeeper, ventures off the standard path so the DM has to add to their world and it all shows how much the player is involved in and interested in the world the DM has created.
Vs Murderhobo: doesn't care about your world as a DM just wants to see what dumb thing they can get away with this time. Needlessly kill NPC, needless theft, needless rapacity and act as though since they are the heroes of the story they can't be punished by anyone or else the dark wizard will have everyone enslaved for a thousand years etc.
The Librarian: Knowledge of rules, sources and guides. Readily helps other players or DM if clarity for a stat is needed. May even have a source readily available if needed.
Vs. Rules lawyer: NOT someone who advocates or argues on behalf of the rules, instead argues for *an interpretation of said rule*. The DM is judge, a real judge can't just ignore the law, so a DM can't blatantly ignore a rule, BUT they are final say with in that specific game what the rules means. Does an NPC with sentinel get an opportunity attack against a PC with mobile? Or does the PC get away? That is a nuance within the laws of the rules that a DM decides on, not the players.
Attentive: the player is there in body and mind. They don't distract. They don't look up dnd roleplayer videos on TH-cam during the session. They are their to play DnD.
Vs. Metagamer: uses knowledge of things beyond what a character would know to gain advantage in game. Memorized monster manual to constantly remind the DM how much life it had left. Interrupts conversation between two PCs or two NPCs or a PC and an NPC to have heard everything the whole time because they were there all along just hidden in the shadows and I want attention - Blah!
The Peacekeeper: makes sure everyone is having a good time and players no there is no ill intent, helps conflicts to resolve, encourages forgiveness. Just wants a nice fun friendly roleplay session.
Vs. Social Paranoid: constantly worries that anything they do or say will upset the DM or the party. Is scared to make a decision even in session zero. Watched lists of bad roleplayer player videos on TH-cam and is convinced they are everyone of them or conversely is worried someone in their party or the DM could be one.
The Actor: puts on a show, changes voice, describes what they do with brevity to foster the imagination among the group. In roleplaying they do just that, they play the role while in the party they play their role.
Vs. The Novelist/FanFic Writer/Fetishist/Slasher Film Scriptwriter etc. :
Needlessly takes up time in play to describe things to minute detail. Takes 5 minutes to do a single action. Overplays an actions details going overly gritty and graphic, if it's blood or semen they will describe where it goes. Controls the narrative the DM has been trying to have through this detail. May even outright still the game to do who on Earth knows what. Refuses to see when the other players have had enough because to them this is their story and they are the main character. A DM with a favored NPC can do just that too.
Anyway that is my list and videos like this inspire me to think of it and other ways to be a roleplayer people will enjoy having around.
This is a damned fine list. Very nice.
I am guilty of some of these, thank you for the wake-up call
As a side note: the Sentinel vs. Mobile actually seems like a pretty clear situation (at least RAW). :P
Sentinel is specifically said to ignore the Disengage action, while Mobile allows you to ignore opportunity attacks, not take a free Disengage. Thus there's no actual conflict between the two, because Sentinel doesn't do anything to counter Mobile, while Mobile counters a general group of things that include Sentinel.
I'm kind of concerned by how many people are treating the fireball example as if it's an improv prompt to see who can figure out how to most creatively inflict extra damage on the player as some sort of "gotcha!" The very thing Seth warned about with the negotiator is that it can create a "player vs DM" mindset, and trying to screw the player in these instances doesn't defuse that, it reinforces it.
I actually have a hilarious story about a minor (and perfectly acceptable) negotiation situation lol. Our monk was hidden by an illusory barrel in an orc stronghold, and an orc was about to pick up the barrel, so he decided to strike and surprise the orc before it discovered the illusion. He did enough damage with flurry of blows to kill the orc outright, and the DM started to describe the vicious assault... Until one of the other players pointed out, "He's a halfling - there's a height difference." The DM changed his description and noted that the orc got punched in the balls so hard that it coughed them up and died.
one of my all time favorite PCs that I ever had in a group in D&D was a halfling monk named Gung-ho Nut-puncher... really says it all, I think...
Seth, I adore your videos! The RPG Philosophy videos in particular. I love the character skits that you do - the indecisiveness one was particularly funny - crossing out 'Use Orphans' really got me, haha. I would love to be a player in a game you DMed. It would be fascinating to see your game running style in action!
Tangentially related but allowing the characters to hire an NPC hireling or pet is a good idea if they're that indecisive. Just make sure they get a cut of the loot so the players are incentivized to eventually let them go. They will probably increase their confidence as they finally do push through and eventually want to do it by themselves, or maybe they could turn it into a meaningful character arc.
I love the negotiator skit with the fireball. I figure that I'd have instantly agreed with the player and said something to the effect of, "That's right! I've already taken that into account. You only take 5/6th of the damage which is 31 points! The actual damage would have been 37 otherwise." ;)
That's what I was thinking too, very simple and disarming.
I'd have said "Very well, so it's only 25 points of damage. Plus, you now stand in boiling hot water, causing d6+3 damage per round".
For me the biggest grief I have both GMing and playing is when people are one step beyond paranoid and being over cautious.
I appreciate that character death is always a disappointment but Jesus, but like an old serjeant I had once said: "every battle plan never survives first contact, in most cases a best laid plan loses out to combat flexibility, so when push comes to shove GO BALLS TO THE WALL!"
You guys need to play Paranoia
@@Tony-dh7mz Trust the Computer, the Computer is your friend. If you do not trust the Computer, you will be used as reactor shielding! I loved Paranoia.
Or paraphrasing Mike Tyson:"Everyone has a plan, until they get a punch in the face."
One of my players is an overly paranoid player and he knows it so he designed his PCs to also be overly paranoid.
It stems from this: it's the PCs vs the GM mindset that he has.
He GM'ed 2 games. Both of them extremely short lived and now NO ONE in our group will let him GM again because he has no sense of scale and is out to actually kill PCs.
YOU FOOLS! You forgot to cover the corridor in spikes in case whoever is in the room charges forward when you open the door. Meanwhile at the tower. As you wait outside the tower arguing on if you should knock on the door. It opens a crack, and someone calls here boy. A small dog runs up to the tower and goes inside
I want to know what calling Jeff would have done.
Since the players refused to act, the world may never know.
Jeff comes and helps you relax by hugging you very strongly. You take 10d6 of crushing damage.
Well since Jeff is an amazing GM I am sure he would have had the totally right idea about what to do.
the fireball argument is so funny i bet its a discussion Seth actually had at some point
My argument about only taking 5/6 fire damage because he was in water: IT IS BLOODY MAGIC!
I would just tell him, that is the damage you get above the waterline.
Never bring physics into a fantasy game. I've played with people who do that, and so my response would have been:
"Oh dang, you're right. I DID forget to take the water into account! Standing in water during a backdraft can cause shock to a body due to the sudden temperature differential, and it would be the same here with the Fireball effect. We'll deal with that once damage is fully calculated. Add to that, magic flames are not affected by mundane weather or elements such as regular water, so the flame would flash-boil the water to steam. So I will need you to take... *rolls dice* 16 more damage with the Burn characteristic. AND the explosive force of air will cause a direct hit on you with no armor, launching you 30ft and leaving me to roll on the Blunt Force critical hit table."
So long as it doesn't slow the game, physics can be fun. But, like it says in the video, don't make it happen too often and slow everything down.
Dont forget the oxygen depletion, as well as the resulting smoke in a small sealed underground corridor, so we have to calculate the ongoing exhaustion from oxygen starvation as well as the Coughing status effect for the whole group. oh, before we forget, whats the durability for your equipment?
My argument on that is that most of its damage is going to be hitting your vitals. Whether it hits your arms or legs is irrelevant, it'll still deal 31 damage. Now if you were half covered and took a fireball that would be fair.
@@EpicFailLawlKat yeah.... See also, the reason that shooting your bow at flying enemies or moving in flight in D&D doesn't involve Pythagorean equations.
Good point on the half-covered part. D&D has specific rules for cover and "5/6ths cover" isn't a thing.
How to kick a problem player out (safely) might be a worthy topic
Tell them your problem first, and if their actions don't change have the players talk to them (as said in the video, sometimes another player complaining is more effective because those types of players may see themselves as 'heroes' for the other players). If the activity continues, instead of just outright kicking them, tell them they should sit out for a game session or two, allow them to come to the session but not actually play and see how the game should be played, teach them what they are doing wrong and help them improve. If that fails, and the players don't want him either, he's gotta go. At this point it should be clear to this person that everyone has a problem with their behavior and they just aren't going to change.
Love your videos, you're always inspiring us to do better as players and GM's. Thank you so much for all your effort.
Upon introducing a new campaign, which clearly stated it would begin in the wilderness and remain there for a while, a player created a rogue full of stats and skills that would make him a fantastic city thief. Three sessions in he quit out of boredom.
I have an issue with "Flavour Of The Week", there is a type of player who wants to regularly change their character, not because they're bored or don't want to be invested, but because they're so excited about the game that they want to try every single option and combination there is.
So very true! I had a game going and was trying to run an adventure where the party would explore a ruined tower. Instead of opening the front door they decided to chop their way inside through the outside solid stone wall. It took them a very long time to break through the wall and I decided in that time all the intelligent life that was in the tower left with all their valuable possessions. They basically decided that the party was filled with absolute crazies and were not to be trifled with.
Great video Seth. In relation to excessive negotiators, I play with a DM who has been playing D&D for years and often forgets 5e rules or confuses them with older editions, so he occasionally makes weird rulings, so I'll briefly ask if that's how the rule works.
If he realises he's made a mistake then I'll either confirm the correct rule or look it up for him, and if he sticks to his guns I'll let it go and continue on with the session.
Most of the time it doesn't have much of an impact even if we don't follow the rules exactly as written and it's not worth starting an argument over inconsequential ruling.
when I DM I have this same problem
5th can be a little weird at times because it encourages more DM fiat like the older editions of D&D. Such as allowing the fighter to come up with dramatic ideas instead of just "I attack it with my sword."
Takes a village...
Collaborative lecture hall, basically.
I half expected the paranoia sketch to end with "We open the door" "The room on the other end of the door is empty." "I check for traps."
thats for the next session :)
Those attempts by the 'negotiator' seemed quite reasonable to me... this may be identifying a problem.
Same lol
I have a bad case of putting way too many flaws on a character. I only do emotional flaws, though. Physical flaws seem like they'd get really obnoxious beyond 1 or 2.
What about Players/GM accusing others falsely to be offenders whilst it is them doing the Mistakes?
Very common, very annoying.
nothing drives me crazier than an indesisive player.
as a PC id just say screw it knock on the door after the first 10 minutes of the party debating mundane nonsense
but as a GM it is incredibly fruatrating.
USE THE ORPHANS! Classic, I wish I had thought of that!
Adam
Your comedic bits are great! There are a lot of people on TH-cam that try to be funny and fail almost every opportunity with some just being flat out irritating but you make me laugh. And thanks for the GM/Player advice / introspective videos. Out of everything, I find these to be the most useful. Keep up the good work!
Players that are overly commited to their characters. They seem to dive so deep into it that it becomes a problem, talking about it endelessly even out of game context.
I've had players wanna do performance at the expense of others time.
Or, worse, throw a massive temper tantrum any time their PC is even scratched, much less killed.
Indecisiveness was on the Critical Role menu yesterday. 3 hours to dig a hole, blew my patience.
Tick tick
Stick a bomb under their collective asses,
Make something time dependent, give them a moment, then count down,
If they do nothing, the character do nothing, Boom
I've rarely (if ever) seen the Players react indecisively when a large, decorative hourglass is brought into view, and turned to "start the timer"... It's one of my favorite subtle means of disturbing action out of the indecisive... mixed with a fiendish grin, it nearly always gets results...
...admittedly, not always the kind of results you're looking for, or have planned around... BUT in a critical level of indecision, anything is more than nothing. ;o)
Gnarth, that’s not subtle, and should be used sparingly,
If used to often that would come across as bullying
@@Tony-dh7mz, literally and legitimately ANY specific tactic brought to the table too often can come across as bullying...
AND the hourglass, on its own does nothing... Even with my fiendish expression, it's just in view... sitting quietly nearby.
The Players' Minds, however, tend to start moving... SO properly employed (just from time to time) it can be very subtle...
As you also suggested, "tick tock"... so what's NOT bullying about putting a bomb into the game? That's an outright declaration "move or die".
I am a bit more devilish and tactful. I've often pulled out the hourglass, noting that Players are busier "quibbling over details" than I'd like, only to fumble for the small box of candy-bars or similar such underneath it, and "absently" leaving the hourglass sitting while I get my chocolate fix... or just another soda. The fact that psychological "prodding" was employed never has to leave the lips of a good GM...
SO subtlety is just as much about HOW you do something as it is about WHAT you do...
Glad you brought that up. ;o)
It’s not subtle, it’s blatant, and once it because systematic it becomes a constant pressure, that’s not good, the hour glass becomes associated with the same gimmick, and no, not every “tactic” brought to the table is bullying, tick tock is a trick to push their initiative, and not to constantly batter them,
A subtle is to use it sparingly,
Blatantly is when it becomes a predictable element within the game,
You can’t get more blatant with an hourglass, use this too much and it’s abusive,
He is just a brain in a jar that the other players have to carry around. *smirks* This is too funny, Seth's so good.
too paranoid, funny in hind sight as another DM said its just a chair
"Veth... I don't wanna talk about the chair..."
Dosis sola venenum facit , eh? :D
All i know about latin - I've learned from reading Asterix comics...
That would be Harry Potter and Catholic school for me
Well rounded xD couse he doesn't have any limbs :)
Ive had the overly cautious party literally say out loud, in front of me, with their actual words, oog, not in character... "keep the GM talking, if hes still talking then he still has information that we need to solve the encounter." they really didnt think i would just filibuster descriptions off the cuff while they procrastinate. they really thought some mundane descriptive words meant that i was JUST getting to the ultimate betrayal plot, and i would somehow slip my tongue, and oops tell them my master plans. like... it is bold to assume i HAVE a master plan... i just want to talk about fantasy worlds guys... they're neat ok. I have fun by talking about them, im not trying to conceal something, and im not going to accidentally flub it. I worked full time as a gm in an escape room and people ALWAYS assumed that i f***ing wake up every morning, put on my clown make up, drink 7 cups of coffee JUST to lie to strangers who paid to have a fun game. like... that is not my life ambition Karen
It Could Be Cool To Have A Paranoid Character, But What You Showed In Your Example I Think Is Not Paranoia. It's Insanity.
As a fairly new DM, I appreciate when my players let me know of a rule I’m forgetting that can change how the scenario pans out (especially in combat since that has the most to juggle and the highest stakes) but PLEASE don’t argue with me about every little thing, especially if it’s in a homebrew campaign and we’re basically breaking the rules as a collective group already
I JUST checked your channel out again today after being gone for a while. This is almost creepy :D Always love seeing your rpg philosophy videos!
that is no coincidence... he's watching us
We have a flavor of the week guy at my table. Because of this, my character always ends up becoming the focus of any campaign. While it is a boost to my ego, I just don't want to be the center of attention all the time.
One good side effect was one of his characters became a demigod and added a ridiculous rp session for my character. God fire is not good for the completion.
You must be a mind reader. I have a player that fits all these categories, and its starting to spreading to the others. I'm going to recommend they watch your series. #KeepADnDAlive
I'm not going to lie, Captain Grimbo actually sounds like a really fun character to play. Like, I'm imagining a brain in a jar with a speaker and and some kind of analog for eyes, be that a camera, or whatever. Most of the time he acts as the ship's AI pilot, but when the characters leave the ship, they take him with in a backpack or something, because he has all this experience dealing with the seedy criminal underground, and the other player characters are a bunch of goody two shoes, so Captain grimbo has to help them navigate whatever situations they might get themselves into. Maybe he can also hack computers, so he can get them past security systems and things like that. Sure, he's absolutely useless in a fight, but his wealth of experience more than makes up for it. Honestly, I think Todd was on to something there
Actually if cool bro had gone with an interface and spider legs then the brawling and piloting would have been rad ya know? The speech is a weird choice though... even if he was quite a talker, I have a hard time believing a brain in a jar could persuade me of anything. Unless it's the one from D&D I suppose haha
The addicted to flaws one hit home immediately, first time I ever ran my friend who used to be the forever dm gave this off hard. For explanation I was doing an epic fantasy game of pathfinder with point buy, and he was asking to have the point value of like 10-15 less points than anyone else just because he felt it would be more interesting. He was also at one point in another game a magus with no points in use magic device which is what magus’ revolve around
Only once has a flaw addict improved my game.. they chose am blind alcoholic ranger and argued for a hamster animal companion for some dumb reason. The whole party ended up TPK'd in a fight against a white dragon, except the hamster who got a Nat 20 save. The party had managed to get the dragon down to one final HP so it was going to be called a good fight by the group, until the flaw addict decided their hamster would attack out of revenge. That revenge managed to hit for 1 point of dmg, slaying the dragon and spurring a legend to be born. That hamster went on to rule the kingdom they saved, and to this day I have kept that lineage intact in my campaign world because it baffles new players, is hilarious, and reminds some of the returning players of that fateful day almost 15 years ago. Needless to say the flaw addict has not returned because I refused to allow them to play the hamster in the next game, because a deaf, drug addicted hamster is too far.. even for me, the DM who has a hamster monarchy.
Great video, Seth!
Would like to add on the part of "becoming a crutch" for the indecisive, though. A couple good tactics mix together (in my experience) to avoid that.
Part 1, don't always just give a "gentle push" for the action, and don't always make a "right answer" the obvious choice. Send them down rabbit holes, waste a bunch of their effort on useless goofing around, and occasionally GET THEM INJURED... As a GM, taking the action lead, is not what I'm supposed to be doing when I've clearly given the PC's agency with the story. Being forced to take that agency back, doesn't equal the Players getting where they wanted to go... simple as that.
SO they grind to a halt for inaction, and maybe I animate the tower to eat someone... random choice, PC or NPC... (no typo's there either... I meant that)
OR maybe instead of a group of tinkergnomes, who's inventions have been leading the locals to gossip about it being haunted... turn out to be a family (pack) of werewolves, completely without warning. The moon's rising, so figure it out or die.
Part 2. ACTUALLY discuss why consequences for inaction are a less than savory mixed bag... Point out that Player ACTION gets rewards, including things like minimizing damage for "chutzpah" levels of creative thinking... advantage where rolls might be "plain" or a lack of disadvantage when Canon prescribes it, simply because "it's just crazy enough they'd never in hell expect that."
BUT point out specifically, that I as GM actually WANT the Players to take up agency when it's handed out. I'm not there to be in control, so giving the control back to me is about as much fun as writing a novel (which is a dragging-ass kind of bore and frankly TOO damn much work).
AND finally, there's no substitute for "the big freakin' hourglass"... If you can't find one in a gothic looking antique store, BUILD it... It should be over-sized, with a decorative "carved wood" look to it. Hand-built (your own) means you can even access the thing to change the amount of sand inside (changing time limits at will) as well as the COLOR of sand used (always a good accent to play with).
At my table, even the most Paranoid Indecisive Paralysis is nearly INSTANTLY cured at the sight of my two-foot tall hourglass even being in view... Should it land on the table, there's ACTION or hell to play!
...and just for the record, I advocate being UNAFRAID to get "a little cavalier" with the rules, regarding rewarding "good" Player behavior. ;o)
Stalling through indecisiveness should also have consequences. imo the best approach to indecisive players is a ticking clock.
Just making sure I understand: the brain in the jar would've been excessively OP, right?
What I probably hate the most as a DM are players who not only negotiate and argue but also dictate how you should run the encounter. Everybody says D&D is a game where everyone should be having fun, but some forget to include the DM.
My two cents:
#5. RPGs are a group activity. Players are required to create characters who want to adventure with the party and whom the party would want adventuring with them. Flaws and weaknesses are great, but there should be something the character is _good_ at too - some reason the other PCs would be willing to tolerate or overlook the character's flaws - otherwise you're basically making the other players RP their characters as morons.
#4. Save it for the other side of the screen.
#3 & 2. When my old DM can play in my D&D campaign, his PC is deliberately the opposite to this precisely because a couple decades of running games have left him with a deep hatred of time wasting. If the party discovers a locked chest, the others have around three seconds to start things moving or his PC is just going to start hitting the thing. Unless another player _tells_ him to wait, he's moving forward.
#1. This is not a good habit gone bad. It's just a bad habit.
Negotiating with the DM isn't a bad habit if you do it tactfully. Here's an example of it being done well. Me and my group are fighting Rust Monsters. Me being the Paladin and the only one actually carrying metal armor and weapons was being focused by them almost entirely. After 'realizing' in character what they were I argued to my DM that I could reasonably keep them focused on things within reach or guard against them hitting my armor. So I describe how I'm using my shield and a spare mace I have to keep them at arms length. Every time I failed a save I kept it to my shield and mace. I lost the shield and the mace became useless, but my shiny armor was safe and my main weapon was fine.
@@PrinceSilvermane
I think the example you gave is a great instance of coming up with a creative plan and working with your DM to make it happen.
But constantly second-guessing rulings is crap.
@@nickwilliams8302 that's why he explains that in excess, it becomes a good habit gone bad.
I find that the best way to deal with an indecisive player is to invite an impatient player to the party, who gets bored of the indecision and makes the decision for them
My late wife filled that function so well.
Fireball in water huh. Sounds like high pressure steam burns all around.
Oy. I am an aggressive negotiator. I gotta tone that shit down. Thanks for the reminder.
My human gunslinger is terrified of the gods. He doesn't know how to act around them or what to do
"Use orphans" huahuhauhaubauhau xD
When I was a kid, my DM killed off so many of my characters, I became quite the paranoiac.
an alternative is to have fun with suicidal characters.
I would add: a player that overly role-playing his character (you know, the kind of talking and acting like he is the character itself)
For example - a fanatic Paladin: at first the other players won't mind someone like that, but later on, having to sit with someone that only talks about "purging darkness with the holy" like it's the only subject worth talking about - can get extremely irritating and annoying.
Furthermore - their stubbornness to stick to the character's personality, can sometimes even hinder the group; for example from one of my past games (which also included an overly role-playing Paladin) - we were stuck in a maze inside a large a dungeon, until we encountered two undead guys who agreed to help us out if we will release them from their eternal torment. After going out of the maze, we thought we could convince them to help us a little more against future obstacles, but our Paladin, without any discussion or even warning - just used his holy mojo ("By the holy...") and released them.
6:06 Seems perfectly reasonable if you're playing Tomb of Horrors. Necessary, in fact.
13:10 they can (emphasis) mention it. Mention it. Then drop it. Remember in critical role when Travis asked Matt a question about the blinded enemy throwing a spear at him in the dark in between two other enemy npcs? Travis asked a question, Matt answered, and Travis just went "ok. Fair enough." He mentioned it, and then he accepted Matt's answer.
I made a blind fighter once in Pathfinder and made sure to discuss it with my party before game started so that it wasnt going to make it too difficult for them. Personally, I love having a hard time in tabletop games. After 4 sessions the group asked me to change characters because a blind fighter really wasnt pulling his weight so I said I would look at changing them between sessions.
The DM ended up helping me come up with a way to compromise so I respected their opinions and made a couple adjustments with the level ups and swapped out all the feats I had picked up and grabbed the blind sense feats to allow me to be blind but able to fight effectively. After the campaign ended I was voted the most valuable member because I was willing to adjust my character to help the party be better as a whole.
Hey Seth! I’ve got a weird question for you. (Or anyone else who could help.)
I’m DMing my first continuous campaign right now, and I have 4 players. They are apart of another campaign that I’m a PC in. However, one of MY players is the DM from that campaign. Lately he’s been correcting every small mistake I make and using his existing knowledge of DnD 5e to just steamroll my combat sessions. Any idea how I should handle the situation? I understand that having prior knowledge isn’t something you can just forget about, but pointing out weaknesses and resistances during fights kind of ruins the surprise. None of the other players really want to stop him from revealing info because he’s their DM in another campaign.
That's something you'll need to talk to him about. 99% of the time, people who do that are doing it with good intentions, believing that they're helping you. The problem is that they're accidentally undermining you and hurting your ability to run and your authority with the other players. People who normally GM can be terrible about that. Explain that one of the first rules of the game is the GM has final say. If you're running, then they should keep their moth shut. If you need help, you can ask. After the game he can talk to you and offer pointers, but during the game he needs to let go of the reins and let you run. He probably has no idea it's a problem.
A lot of players become intimidated out from even running a game because of the fear that their normal GM will judge or call them out on any mistakes. Any GM should be happy when a player steps up and takes the driver seat and lets them actually play from time to time.
lol, I had a character playing GURPS that was a brain in a jar.
Randy Myer I had flaws backfire bad in GURPS once, but I figure it’s the GM’s fault for not stopping me during session 0 and saying, “I don’t want to give anything away, but trust me. This concept won’t work for my campaign.”
Long story short: He billed it as a superhero-type game, and wanted us to make a superhero group comprised of “best-of-the-best” type characters with no powers (Black Widow/Zangief/Leverage types.) I opted to be the money. I took a variety of flaws, most notable of which was a CRIPPLING cocaine addiction, in order to afford having just, like, a gajillion dollars. I had henchmen and toys and the ability to grease whatever kind of wheels, etc.
It seemed like a fun and interesting concept, but the GM should’ve told me about the bait-and-switch. First mission we fell into the real campaign headfirst, which turned out to be a time-and-dimension-hopping “Sliders” sort of ordeal, but without the parallel universe aspect. Immediately, my character had no toys, no money, no henchmen, and no access to his substance. Needless to say he was worse than useless, no fun to play, and a burden to the entire party at that point (what with having lost all his advantages, and an absolute truckload of negatives combined with a near total inability to focus on the situation at hand, both stemming from his extraordinarily severe withdrawal.)
One of my worst experiences as a player, and totally avoidable.
I once mastered a small 2-player Shadowrun table.
It has some really nice and memorable moments in it I gladly think back to.
Allthough that paranoia-problem was rampant.
So much that in a (admittedly not a beginner-job) job extracting some scientist from a facility in cuba it took two or three evenings just to figure out _how to travel to Cuba_.
And don't get me wrong - my players were excited enough to even phone me between games about their plans.
However as live got on and things like studies came in the way the group dissolved - and we never made it to Cuba...
Robert Nett Shadowrun is really a game that lends itself to paranoia. I‘m currently playing Shadowrun 5 and enjoy quite the unhealthy dose of paranoia. It’s ok for SR5, but I hope I don’t stay as paranoid in other games.
Thanks for the RPG Philosophy videos Seth. I originally watch these videos to see if I could recognize them in other people, but I end up seeing myself in some of the personalities and it has helped me become a better player in the way of recognizing my own flaws.
Again, thanks for the videos Seth.
5:48
Someone's been playing the Tomb of Horrors.
Can't just check the door. Gotta check if the wall behind the fake door is hiding another door.
Door-Fake Door, but actually a Door.
Another awesome video Seth.
Unrealistic, they crossed out 'burn it'
I find rules lawyers helpful when I'm learning a system. Long as they don't start a court case against me.
The helpful players who can point to rules I think of as Rules Sages (aka The Librarian). Those are handy to have and should be given way more credit as good players.
Rules Lawyers are more about trying to exploit and get away with things, using the rules as a means to get away with something outside the spirit of the game. And despite popular belief, Rules Lawyers don't necessarily know the rules, as much as they're confident in their argument.
ohhh lord i am the flavour of the week character..... i dont know what to do about it. I just get to play so seldomly, and i get so easily intruiged by new characters.
...... i might be more in love with character creation than playing, but i do want to play :(
I would like to add one extra player sin to this and that is a hoarder because it starts of well enough with wanting some good gear but this player soon starts taking and having everything even if the item doesn't suit their class or is even ideal and tailored for another player.
I love your videos Seth and I love Todd
I noticed that I often start being the negotiator when in bad games, that or it's a really stingy GM. [Which is also a really bad GM type. i.e. Player vs Game Master]
By that first thing, I mean like 3~ hours into a game that I've been bored for like the last 1-2 hours, I'll start arguing, and correcting them, and this and that. [Take note I've also fallen asleep in some boring games before] Also this normally only happens in 1 shots, and my first time gaming with these people. (Maybe next I'll just drop out in the middle of the game)
I'm a simple man, I see new video from Seth I upvote 👍
I love the scenes this time. They are so fun.
The indecicive scenario? Enemies approach, looking for a fight. The tower is not safe either.
And the fireball? F-you, it's magic.
Well done The negotiator in my group is also the rules lawyer and the strategist. I'm looking at you, Kevo :P