Instant Trigger Player Behaviors

>His players unironically arent lowkey attention whores who take every roleplay encounter to show off and be the center of attention

I am so sorry user

I'm angry at you, but I'm in this thread to be angry, so thank you.

>Session goes well, players get to level advancement point.
>"Ok, you guys advance to Level X, see you next week."
>Next week comes by...
>"Oh yeah, I forgot to level up, haha, I'll just do that now!"
>spends the next half-hour considering whether or not to roll for Hp or take average...

>he hasn't learned to just improvise literally everything

user, let me tell you how to have fun being a DM and not give two shits what the players decide to do.

God I hate this shit; I've literally babysat my players through the leveling process at least twice and they STILL don't do it properly (or at all, really) when I tell them it's time. Like holy fuck, how hard is it to read the PHB and write your new shit down on your sheet?

The sooner you stop helping them and start actively denying them things because they don't have the information on hand, the sooner they'll improve.

>First session of new group
>my regular dm introduces everyone
>3 experienced players and total noob
>intro scene
>be me
>be barbarian/former soldier doing merc work after secret disgrace
>Escorting two scholars(other 2 expierenced players) through hostile territory
>Sitting around campfire talking
>Encounter new guy
>Dm ask him what does he do?
>"I steal their food and run away"
>wtf mode activated
>Try to in character bluster about beating his ass while doing best to heavily imply this a bad start and give the guy an out
>insults my character and attempts to steal more shit
>tries to sneak attack me

I just looked at the dm and me and the other 2 expierenced guys step stepped out for a smoke while the dm talked to the guy about rules and social cues. I didn't want to kill a noobs character but wtf dude?

That session fell pretty flat after that and no one could meet up again so I just went back to my other group (same dm). I'm still flabbergasted. Like did that guy watch community and decided he wanted to be Pierce? Shit had me straight tripping dawg.

The worst part is that, "That guy" is the only one who does it and he knows how to level properly, he just doesn't get around to it...

To be fair this is what every major european power in history did. You aren't fighting against a fringe behavior but human nature

>My character looks like Tom Brady and is an elf that loves eating Snickers and smoking weed

If you can't even pretend to be interested don't agree to play.

Rules lawyers, or players who constantly argue with me whenever something doesn't go their way.

> Players are trying to break into place
> Player asks what type of cameras these are
> I say they're cheap, physically wired ones
> Guy goes to back of core book and points out obscured fluff passage to point out this is an irregularity in the setting, as most electronic equipment is wireless.
> Also says copper wiring is expensive now, although that's never mentioned.
> Agree, see no need to argue this.
> Guy proceeds to go through tactical plan like he was already going to do it, and was only interrupted by that roadblock.
> Motherfucker didn't care about the setting at all, he just argued about a setting detail so his tactical plan wouldn't be hindered.

He did a lot of other bullshit too, like complain that his character should always have bullets when he didn't purchase them on his sheet (I figured if he was going to rules lawyer me, I'd return the favor), which he then complained about to the other players, and arguing that he should be able to have whatever simple items he wanted after I ruled that the lifestyle he had taken required that he list all his belongings, since he was basically a squatter, which was a decision that barely even effected him.

The most damning thing was the time I called him out on it. He said he wasn't a rules-lawyer, but cared a lot about 'system mastery.' The motherfucker was such a rules-lawyer that he argued semantics to avoid being called a rules lawyer.

That guy occupies one of the top places on my list of the worst players I've ever GM'd for.

PS: Actually let me correct myself lest people think i'm lefty pol. Every major power EVER in the history of EVER did this in some shape or form, regardless of continental origin. New land? Time to fucking kill the natives and steal it

System mastery can be a distinct thing from rules-lawyering.
In his case it sure as hell wasn't.

I know, I know; I've been trying to cut them some slack since they're basically brand new to the game and have some funky schedules, but it's starting to get absurd.

I don't see why you'd be angry at _me_. Frankly whenever I do evil shit I always have 2 rules for it. 1.) Make sure it doesn't splash back onto the party, and 2.) make certain any evil act is only as evil as it needs to be to accomplish whatever goal you've set forth. (I.E. Burn down the orphanage if your goal is to create community wide instability, or something of the like but if you just want to kill one person then take the fucking time to get that _one person_ and not that person and literally everyone around them.)

>hey DM we leave one grunt alive so we can question him later
>what do you mean he doesn't know anything?
>fuck it let's spend the next 20 minutes torturing him

I don't let anyone take prisoners anymore.

>improvise literally everything
Meme GM'ing. If a GM doesn't care enough to put any effort into his game, then the players won't either.

Eh, I feel like if you obsess over system mastery and theorycrafting, you're missing the point of RPGs.

The strength of TRPGs nowadays is the social aspect, and the ability to create any kind f story you want, without the constraints a computer game would impose.

If your idea of fun is wanking over numbers all day, go play a computer game. That kind of enjoyment is not just acceptable, but expected and catered-to in vidya.

Besides, if a system is good enough, it will be a simulation of reality, with things happening for logical reasons, with as few 'gamey' things as possible, and therefore no room to kajigger and fiddle the best 'build' possible.

>roll up a quick session for a couple dudes
>they find a magical stone sword that's much lighter than it should be
>say it's harder than any normal rock
>mention it has no name
>they name it Hardon
>rest of the session is jokes about their Hardon and what they're doing with it

When people think of characters only as glorified stat sheets

>Hey user, how good are you at bluffing?
>Oh, well, uh, I've got a terrible pokerface and it always gets me in trouble
>What? No, what number do you have next to the bluff skill

Honestly it's why I hate skill systems in games so much. So many people I play with only care about the numbers. Whenever a problem is presented to them they spend a ton of time OOC discussing plans/tactics and asking each other what rank of X skill they have and shit like that. If you want to do that shit just go play a tactical minis boardgame for fuck sake.

Last time someone did that to me I just responded with "let's find out", ignored whatever out of character plan they were trying to figure out, and had my low charisma wizard start trying to bluff his way past some guards. It didn't end well and the one player was incredibly pissy for the rest of the session.

Never let your players collectively name anything.

>new campaign
>first level characters
>worldbuild a contextual map
>players ignore all plot hooks, their own background stories, the entire contenient on which they live and work have homes and employers, bush off the fact none of them know one another and... head straight for the section named "kobold island" even though it is completely the ass other end of the high level world map in a random ass ocean.
>so flustered I ask wtf guys
>"well we're first level and have to fight kobolds"

I just facepalmed and didn't do a second session.

In fairness, that sort of thing is really dependent on both your DM and fellow players. If your DM is really big on punishing failed checks (a tendency I don't care for, but I digress) it makes a lot of sense to minimize the risk of punishment. If you still do that even when the DM's more freewheeling, then yeah you're a bit of a schmuck.

>user hates strategy
>Tries to pass it off as 'roleplaying is king!'
>Doesn't want to admit to having shit taste

To add to this, players should, ideally, have enough of a sense of what each of them is good at that OOC statchecks are mostly replaced by IC discussions about who should attempt a task.

Fuck off back to Pathfinder Society, furfag

>run one shot
>put a little intro about wagon breaking down so it's not just "you're in town together for no fucking reason"
>players spend 3.5 hours getting to the first fucking line of the first page of the canned one-shot
>zero combat
>95% ad lib on my part

apparently everybody is REALLY FUCKING SERIOUSLY concerned about where their sleeping bag goes

actually it was hella fun but they spent the last 10 minutes trying to decide whether to knock on the door of the place they'd finally got to, return to town or sleep in the driveway at 6pm because it got dark

>talking like this
Holy shit man, what year are you stuck in?
but yeah, that sounds like shit. at least your GM was an adult and actually talked to him about it

Woah. So this is the power of saltiness...

Busybodies.

I'm a pretty amiable GM. I usually don't care how players act as long as they're engaging with the game on some level. But I absolutely hate it when a player decides not only is he the "leader" but it's also his job to police the rest of the party's behavior like he's their own Internal Affairs office. It's especially awful when the player uses meta-knowledge (Rogue: "I pickpocket the guy" Paladin: "I stop him").

I get sticking to your character, and I understand not liking certain behaviors. But when you're a player you're among equals.

There's nothing salty about wanting subhuman trash to stay in it's containment thread.

>be player
>get votekicked behind my back for not being heroic enough
>I'd beat up a guy who'd robbed us with non-lethal blows

how sad does your life have to be to not be able to endure one guy not playing like a paladin?

>wanting subhuman trash to stay in it's containment thread
>subhuman trash
But user, you're here.

But the Paladin should be using non-lethal blows for fighting someone like that...

>Anouncing two month before that I'll run Rise of the runelords
>First player makes his character the same day to avoid forgeting about it
>Second one gives me his final sheet 3 weeks prior the dead line.
>Third gives it 2weeks before.
>Fourth player didn't do it.

It burns me inside. He doesn't have any difficulties. He'll send me his sheet at the lqst minute. He always do that.

Also he does not read the information provided so I included it as a dick move to force himto read when he should have fiven his sheet.

>player turns to me (DM)
>I tell the elf girl yadda yadda
>I look at him and go, why are you telling me?
>he turns to elf girl at other end of table
>collects his stones to talk to an IRL grill in character
>hey elf girl, yadda yadda
>ELF GIRL HAS A NAME YOU KNOW

I could have died

Given*

I'm on a phone.
I created a dedicated Discord server and pinged everyone for the deadline. He does not have excuses to be this late and to not read the notification since he's always on discord.

I'll tear my hair out if one of the player of my other group gives me his sheet before the late fucker.

honestly it's not like they don't KNOW they are going to level up. I mean YOU ARE GOING TO BE LEVEL 3 AFTER LEVEL 2 how fucking hard is it to prepare?

as DM I don't mind that much because it is your time, but as a player this pisses me off so much because I don't want to spend 4 hours doing jack shit

Not really a player, but something a GM did that still pisses me off to this day.

>Playing a super power-hungry character
>Contract with devils because they outright stated they wouldn't steal or buy my soul unless I brought it up
>Do some favors for them, gets to some kinda dark shit, but still managing to keep a 'good' face up for the rest of my party
>Finally the big moment comes, tell me they want me to help them damn an entire town to hell, imply they will owe me a big favor
>Do it
>Campaign falls apart
>GM later tells me they weren't actually going to do me any favors in return for that, not because they were done with my services but because "Haha, fooled you!"

I don't know man... I just. Devils found a super competent mortal that was entirely willing to pick up almost any contract placed in front of them and the DM has them pull a prank? He literally outright stated that's all it was. It wasn't the character arc where my character was supposed to realize evil would always betray him in the end, or get him killed or caught by paladins or anything like that.... 'it was just a prank bro!'

That did, does, and will always make me so goddamned angry.

>player rolls insight
>uh, 3
>you're convinced he thinks he's the queen of england and you're convinced he's right

>player rolls perception to see if anything is moving around the campfire
>uh, 3
>everything is moving, the shadows are closing in, the shapes dance in the night as they come closer and closer surrounding you and the party

Honestly I don't think skill should be rolled in the open because they fucking KNOW. I daydream about rolling a 3 behind the screen and giving them convincing information.

On the other hand a player critted smelling a foul looking ingredient and I had to make up an entire fucking region and culture with obscure delicate sauce that was an acquired taste but highly sought after and very expensive. In my notes it was just "you hope it's not water because it's already stew colored"

>Rogue: "I pickpocket the guy" Paladin: "I stop him"

>ok roll perception
>well you see it, how do you stop him then
>ok, as you grab his wrist bumping the guy, he turns around and thinks YOU'RE pickpocketing him
>he attacks you ignoring the rogue
>roll for initiative

and let him go to jail or smite the commoner 1

It's less about finding ways to punish this behavior and more resenting how it always causes IRL tension between party members. Players who constantly roll against the party--even if it's just Perception checks--are drama bombs on a short timer.

>Implying good improv doesn't take effort

my point was nobody was even a paladin
the funny thing was the email looking for a replacement had some trash about "heroic players who want to be heros" or something. I think the game fell apart a few sessions later.

the real irony is the guy was such a pussy IRL he didn't even come to me, or even bring it up in character, he emailed the rest of the group behind my back. I only found out because the DM gave me a heads up.

>Can I use [skill that clearly wouldn't be usable in situation]?

I think at that point it's a good idea for the GM to start enforcing "IRL decision making time takes ingame time."
If you're going to be indecisive, there'll need to be consequences.

I PM'd this chick 6 to 8 times before the first session and got fucking nothing, to the point where I invited the first guy on the waitlist. She then shows up a half hour late because she went to the wrong place (one I'd clearly written Subject to Change all over and changed a week prior and sent her a PM about it).

She'd seen none of my PMs but specifically mentioned the content of at least two of them, I shit you not citing one as "you said send me an email but there wasn't an email address". Yeah bitch I got tired of typing it into the last four fucking PMs.

Wait, how do you get kicked out of a group by someone who isn't the DM?

user, you wasted an entire post writing a NeverHappened™ greentext whining about how players already don't care for your horrid improvised acting and unnecessary long descriptions of the environment.
They would probably not care less if you dropped that shit.

which is why you punish them until they stop

no but I get it went on to be a drama queen, never in the same part of the map as the party, never in the conversations but always had something to contribute, character was a vegetarian and wouldn't eat (I was looking up the exhaustion tables when she finally ate a ration). If there was more than one more session...

He says he got "votekicked" which I assume means a majority of players agreed he's out. Of course the DM can probably veto that but that risks even more drama.

it was a tight group and I was new, replacing someone who literally table flipped. he basically laid down a "him or me" to the rest of the players behind my back and was going to blackball me when I drove a fucking hour to get there, but like I said the DM gave me a heads up.

>Last time someone did that to me I just responded with "let's find out", ignored whatever out of character plan they were trying to figure out, and had my low charisma wizard start trying to bluff his way past some guards.
You were That Guy, user.

>muh pathfinder society

But your logic, while sound, leads to freeform. That's fine, but it's not a game and it's not a TTRPG.
A significant point of a TTRPG is the game aspects allowing a degree of direct control over what your character can and cannot do or do well. Being able to say "my dude swords gud" is important, and you can't distance that from system mastery no matter how hard you try without abstracting to ludicrous levels like Fate et al.

How did you damn a whole town to hell?

Not the same user.

well, sounds like a lesson learned.

>"haha I didnt prepare at all for this session, did you notice?"

Yes, we noticed.

Prepare your games, you can do mediocre at best relying on improv, zero direction means its just a fuckoff sandbox that tastes like nothing. The players will notice if youve prepared something special, you just need to feel out what they are going to do. This works well if your players are your close friends. If your any good your players will notice your effort and appreciate it.

I'm all for players trying things outside of their skill sheet numbers for roleplaying purposes because that can be fun. But no one likes dealing with some hothead don't constantly charging into situations he objectively can't handle and getting the party in trouble. That's fun occasionally, but when it becomes a recurring thing it's just frustrating.

There is no conspiracy to make traditional games politically correct. Characters in fiction and gaming communities simply change with respect to the latest cultural values. But you fedora-tipping cancerous fucks always blame imaginary SocJus boogeymen when people start hating you for the shit that you do. As long as you continue to refuse act like decent human beings, people will keep noticing.

But of course, you will keep blaming imaginary "SJWs", "poseurs" and "normies" when you the public hates you for the scum you are. And let's not even get started on how you all react to games becoming more popular and easily accessible.

Literally nobody but you has mentioned PFS or even Pathfinder. Sounds like you're projecting.

You really are retarded, aren't you?

Improv is useful. Using literally nothing but improv is a shitty crutch that collapses under any meaningful weight.

Players will notice if you plan nothing, players will lose interest in your game, players will drop out of your game the longer it goes on.

Well yeah, but to a fairly real extent system mastery IS getting from "I want to play ___, who can do w, x, y, and z"to "I'm playing ___, who can do w, x, y, and z" instead of "I'm playing ___. I couldn't figure out how to do z. I think they can do w, x, and y. In actuallity, the game doesn't support this method for x and I'm trash at y. All I really have is w but I'll waste time failing at x and y too."
System mastery, even in a friendly plays-right sense, is critical to fun play for everyone involved.

fucking hell man, I am sorry you have one of those types.

I had this recently. It was both fun and a bit painful, as the one shot became a few sessions long, but the good thing was the characters were pre-fab and assigned at random, and it helped me realize I have a That Guy who doesn't know he's that guy.

fucks sake last night this happened at my weekly game and it was painful. most of the players were just fucking around doing shit all and then talking about real life shit that was so god damn infuriating, so me and the one other dude just started messaging each other with memes and shit until there was an opportunity to actually move the plot forward. the DM messaged me afterwards asking how to prevent that in future, and I just said to let them goof around and waste time, then show them the consequences of being in a high pressure scenario and cracking jokes or wanting to go do some shit that has zero current plot relevance and will get things fucked up for the party if they don't take care of it.

But your players also won't appreciate it if you use them as a captive audience.

A good GM is both prepared and adaptable.

What

As a player,

>Players never shut up and let the DM talk
>Players interrupt the DM mid-sentence, repeatedly
>Players interrupt the DM to ask for rolls
>Players just directly ask for a roll rather than describing an action
>Players willingly waste half a session dicking around in town, then proceed to wonder why it feels like we don't get much done in sessions

I felt like I was being the teacher's pet just by virtue of being to only one trying to stay on track.

The argument being made was
>just improvise literally everything
Which is decidedly not advocating a balance between preparation and adaptability. Nobody is arguing that you are supposed to treat your game as a novel.

>On the other hand a player critted smelling a foul looking ingredient and I had to make up an entire fucking region and culture with obscure delicate sauce that was an acquired taste but highly sought after and very expensive. In my notes it was just "you hope it's not water because it's already stew colored"
Stop meme-DMing. A foul liquid shouldn't transmogrify into prized fine dining just because a player 'crits' a perception roll.

Agreed. Much better options include but are not limited to. Loudly gagging, or ewww fuck I got some on me, it's in my fucking nose, oh god, oh no.

>collapses under any meaningful weight
In what way? If anything, you would think having less set in stone would leave you more flexible and able to roll with any curveballs the players throw at you.

t. GM who improvs 98% of his sessions

I hate when my players dont get into the game/play like a video game.
>Can I roll to find alchemy ingrediants.
Does this during an important moment in the story/battle/when other players are trying to get shit done.
>I put my dick on the barkeeps shoulder.
He hits you for 5 dmg and kicks you out
>the player who reads about the creatures after a session and goes "hey user you played that monster wrong"
Fuck you, I play monsters how I want. You DM then.
>player just says "I tell the npc everything" or just "I say"
Pet peeve but still, youre a character just fucking act like it. Especially if you give me shit for not acting in character enough as DM.
>there is an npc outside his house
I break into his house and steal his shit

Fuck players sometimes man.

I feel ya user.

I believe in the use of systems for representing things, we agree on that. What I'm arguing is, if you put most of your time and enjoyment into that aspect of it, you'll be much better served elsewhere.

You do realize that people that enjoy the crunch, and how mechanics interlock with one another, are the same people that go on to design games right?

Numbers and rules help keeping the game from turning into GM telling stories or Magical Tea Party. If you don't get it, read some freeform rp forums.

>when the guy does actions that contradict his personality written in char list in the first act and gm doesn't stop him

> System is a simulation of reality
No. System is a simulation, but not necessary of our world.

So you can't switch between "in this world it's possible" and "such things would never be available IRL so I ban it"

Make NPCs call them "One Hardon gang".

Freeform is a game tho, it's the goddamn RPG in TTRPG. As long as you have people sitting at a table, agreeing to get together to do a thing that has boundaries with the real world, implicating playing roles/acting, you have a TTRPG. It's the rawest form, and what you're describing is a convention and traditional way of game design.

m8, the DM I got praised the most for was one I only prepared the beginning for (point being on top of that I was doing friends and went their ways more than the other times cause it was easing the task)
sorry to say it to you, but you just have unimaginative cunts as DM.

It's the RP, but not the G.

Yes Yes. My part of the hobby has more LETTERS, letters that fill it with POWAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

No user, YOU are the cancer.

Every party has one person who is the prime mover, and instead of working with the group, you're off shitting around on your own.

>>player A, "well my character is chaotic neutral so it's something he would do."
This makes me pretty mad.

Then again, I hold players to a high standard just like me: if my character does something, it's because s/he has a reason to do so.
>GM NPC: "Why did you run away from the guards? You are clearly capable of defeating them, so why?
>PC: "First, they were only following orders. Can't fault them for that. Second, I am not very good without my weapon. Thirdly, I can outrun most people reliably well: it simply was the safest and best option."

>'my last DM let me do it!'
>I understand, but I am not [last GM]. This is how I run my games, so I hope you understand.

> My character is gonna take a shit.
>"Alright, you head to the bathroom. While you are away, a cute young girl working as a waitress approaches the party and asks them if it's true that they take care of monsters and bad people."