PREORDER The Army Painter Gamemaster Character Set: shop.thearmypainter.com/us/gm1004p Want to WIN one for yourself? You can enter right here: gleam.io/wkCHV/the-army-painter-gamemaster-giveaway-with-taking20
As a Power Gamer and GM most games. My advice to power gamers is optimize to slack off. You have more flexibility to be reckless, try special actions, and let allies have your loot shares out of pure pride. If you're a tank, give the enemy a free hit, it's cool when it works and hilarious when they crit. Get serious only when neccessary. It's allot of fun.
Exactly this. I try to make powerful characters so I can actively do cool shit or make reckless moves, rather than playing tactically. I _want_ to not be 100% cautious, to not be quite 100% optimal, to do dumb daring stunts primarily because they're an option, but to have them be at least _somewhat_ viable for my character to attempt.
Good suggestions. Personally, I tend to get a bit power-gamey, especially in Pathfinder because it's so easy to do and another bit of advice I would add is that I think it's better to intentionally pick an underwhelming mechanical concept for a character and then try to optimize THAT. Don't look for the best character you can, look for an odd/interesting character that shouldn't really work well and then try to make that work as best as you can. 9 times out of 10, you'll end up with a reasonable power curve AND an interesting and fun character to roleplay.
Best way to deal with a rules lawyer citing Crawford "Jeremy Crawford isn't running this session. I am." Edit: Also, rules _enthusiasts_ are a boon from the gods
"Crawford said that? Huh. Since we are not playing D&D, I don't give a shit what he says. This is the RPG called FantasyCraft." -- Yes, I have actually said this
@@myst_hg let me correct you there. You are not allowed to lie to your players. You’re allowed to withhold information they wouldn’t have, or change things from what was originally intended. And your NPCs are allows to lie to their characters, but you the DM are not allowed to lie to your Players.
I try really hard to get other party members to speak up and give input. Sometimes it feels like it is left to me to move the story forward. I am conflicted by this. I want others to participate more.
It’s important to remember that for a significant subset of players, the thing they want most is “to have fun playing a game with friends,” and so being a spotlight hog is actually helpful. Communication is the critical component to knowing if you’re a “bad” hog or a “good” hog.
I used to be a powergamer. Soon after I was introduced to the game, I went looking for tips/information on how to be "better" at the game, and I ended up on the 3.5 WotC Optimization forums. That's basically where I learned how to play. Took a while for me to break the mindset of needing to "win" the game. It became a bit of a joke with my friends once I did break free, but it also led me to how I would deal with powergamers when I GM: "You can powergame if you want, but remember, I'm probably better at it than you." Our GM was running another game for another group, and a couple of the players had started to lean into powergaming a bit. He got exasperated and finally told them, "If you keep this up, I'm going to have Odentin build an enemy for you to fight." They kept it up, and he brought it to me. Apparently what I built nearly TPK'd them, and they scaled back on that attitude. Every powergamer player I've had since has either taken the challenge, and took some manner of joy in the escalation, or took it to heart and toned down the need to win. In a few cases, they shifted focus to helping the rest of the party with optimization options so that EVERYONE could feel powerful together. Those have always been the most fun games, too.
I was a huge meta-gamer because I love strategy games to the umpteenth degree. I basically curved it myself because I DM. I always put myself in my Monster's shoes by looking at, "What does this monster know, and what does it want?" and I do that with my character now, "Am I stupid? Do I got muscles? Yeah, I'm gonna push that boulder down the hill at the enemy convoy"
I used to DM a lot and I've usually made it clear when we get a new player that the rules are to assist my storytelling and the player's immersion. If the person has a problem with how I interpret a rule or game mechanic, he is free to speak to me about it after a session but I don't condone disruptive arguments during gameplay.
So what's your goal in DM'ing and your view of DnD? Do you run primarily a game with rules that has storytelling like an RPG, or a story that has some rules closer to a byo adventure book? I find that the first lends itself to rules lawyers and power players. To them its multiplayer game. Where the second is more for RP storytelling players. I think expectation is incredibly important especially when getting new players. If you're the former wouldn't it be best to just draft up a rule addendum to hand out ahead of time then? It avoids any complications and as long as you're consistent and fair and the rules lawyers will have nothing to lawyer. If you're the latter, just saying that will keep both lawyers and power gamers from even wanting to join in my experience.
@@elliottparks8762 For me it's more about the storytelling. I played a lot of VTM and there were other times where I'd run games without any game mechanics at all. I'll list house rules at the start of a campaign but I don't mind people having complaints about mistakes I made or the interpretation of specific rules. I'm more than happy to listen to complaints after sessions but I won't allow a session to devolve into an argument or a debate on rules. I've been DMing since the early 90s so there's not many rules I haven't heard and I know I don't interpret things exactly as other's do so I don't mind people pointing out problems they have with my rulings but, for the enjoyment of others, as well as myself, I don't like sessions getting out of hand.
I have ASD and have a tendency to be a bit of a "rules lawyer", especially if I feel it leads to something unjust! But as I grown older, my memory starts to fail me, so I’m not as bad as I used to be!
@@DaDunge I can do that as well, and my own "rule lawyering" is mostly if there's something I find unjust. I fully recognize that the DM has to have room to manoeuvre within to make a game exiting. So I don't argue over everything! I think both your response and mine can be within typical traits of people with ASD. At least if it's to such a degree that it's more than most other people.
@@gorillaguerillaDK yeah I can also from time to time bring up a rule but I try to remember to phrase it along the lines of "It's your call but I think RAW it's like this". Bringing up rules is not a problem really its when the DM makes a ruling and someone keeps arguing.
For Rules Lawyers: I give each player one challenge token per game. If they disagree with a ruling I make, they can use the token and challenge me. They have one-minute to make their case. I will make my decision, and the matter is settled until after the game. At that point, I usually get an earful.
I recently adopted a new methodology I like for rules lawyering. Try not to interrupt more than twice a session. Save other cases for after the game. Write a note so if you forget, you can review your notes to remind yourself to discuss with the GM after the game. You might also want to consider only interrupting for big differences in outcomes. This does not mean you let the little stuff slide by forever, you just wait till after the game. It is also very helpful if you have page references ready when you bring up the case.
I would like to add: the bipolar player. An especially painful subsection of the disengaged player. One who becomes a spotlight hog when their dice are on fire, and when they start rolling poorly, they disengage and get silent, or get super, super upset. Basically, someone whose enjoyment is based off of the success of the dice rolls.
I definitely was infected with power gaming skills after years playing with a group of them But I think the difference that helps keep me apart from the typical Munchkin is intent My intent behind building mechanically robust characters isn't to be badass; its to be the best support for a given role that my fellow companions can require. If I'm making a support character I'm going Twilight Cleric who will stack auras of Temp Hp, real hp (on a bonus action for the rest of the right on a single spell slot) and mounted/armored for quick high ac combat medic transits. Or my current Artificer who (upon realizing we were all full casters with almost no armor lol) went full battle turtle; heavy no spell buffed AC of 22, multitude of reaction abilities, flight and strength to evac fallen squishies and then heal them my Cure, teleportation to interpose this Armored Artificer between an oncoming big baddy and a half hp'd Wizlock or Barzard to prevent the inevitable. I've got mediocore damage and a considerably smaller list of spells compared to the rest of the party and my healing is quite middling (ever heal matters). Its never really about Power Gaming for myself, its for the safety or success of others. I need no credit, I take no spotlight (with natural occasions as exception; I'm not a wallflower lol)
I'm a power gamer so I usually get around it by only playing healing/support characters. This way I don't ruin the game for everyone else and more enable my party to do more fun things! I also try and bake in a serious character flaw into my PC like for example my circle of stars druid has a wisdom of 22 and can heal with a single cure wounds for like 30 health. But he has an intelligence of 7. So I make him walk into obvious traps or get led on by people because he just is not smart enough to know any better! Plus I regularly make my character the butt of jokes because he's such an idiot so it prevents him from being the "I'm good at everything" hero.
Our campaigns usually involve some metagaming, but not as badly as the description here. It's usually taking spells or skills that they think the DM can't counter like spells with no save or all anti-undead stuff where the campaign revolves around undead.
I'm my group's Forever GM, and my take on the last point (taking all anti-undead spells in an undead heavy campaign) is looking at whether everyone in the group knows the same info. If I've told all the players "hey, this is going to be an undead heavy game" and someone builds an anti-undead character, that's being a smart player. If on the other hand, they're working from info not everyone has, like if they recognized the title of a box campaign, or they know the portfolio of the obscure deity who's temple they're going up against (assuming that know: religion checks were either not made or got a 4 or something) and they still do the thing? That's metagaming.
I'm typically the "most experienced" player at the tables I play at. I try really, really hard to not be a rules stickler when DMs are doing things on the fly, or maybe don't know the rules or mechanics as much or as readily as I do. The biggest thing I've tried to learn lately is to be the "anti-spotlight hog" that you mentioned. I have been making a point to urge other players to use their strengths (in-game and in-character) to help the party. "I think you're probably the best suited to lead us through this forest" or "maybe you could have a look around, you're pretty attentive". It's really fulfilling and honestly more fun to see others shine and get excited about the game/their character in those moments. And the game functions and flows better!
I tend to be my group of friends always DM. My buddy, we'll call him Jonathan, will continually, as soon as I mention the monster that he has only found out existed 5 seconds ago, will pick up a s die and without asking me say "I'm rolling to see if I know if this is a xyz monster'. I once had to explain to him why a farmer, until a month ago, who didn't even know that mind flayers existed, didn't know anything about such a creature making me feel bad for him wasting a nat 20
For the nat 20, I'd put in a unique explanation. He hosted a travelling bard in his house once. Food and board for song and entertainment. The bard did a poem about mind flayers that was informative and memorable enough to come up.
As a DM keep track of which skills each character is proficient in and ask that/those characters are the ones that check/do the thing. Helps keep all players involved.
probably not what you intended, but going Sorc Fighter instead of Warlock Sorc might be better. That means that once per short rest, I can machine gun action surge twin Firebolt and then quicken scorching ray. Might not be as good as eldrich blast tho. I like to power game toward concepts. Synergies are my favorite things to test out in game. I'm kind of a rules Lawyer by virtue of knowing 90% of the player rules. I think the only issue had with this was in one combat, where I was trying to ask the dm if the paladin in our group would get extra damage on smite on the target. He was super adamant on not saying what the creature type was, claiming I was meta gaming when stating theres no check for the extra damage- either they're a fiend or undead, and they take more, or they arent and they dont. He, after the game, found out that the fiend group covers devils and demons, proving me correct.
I admit I have the DM vs Player mentality as DM. But I am not toxic about it. I find the combat stress is helpful when the enemies are actually trying to kill the players
Re: stealth and metagaming. At my table the players don't roll stealth when they take the hide action, they roll stealth when there is someone nearby to detect them. You can't tell how well you're hidden, after all.
Would love to see one of these for dms... the combative dm (the dm that actively tries to kill thier players regardless of any story), the writer dm (the dm that wrote a play instead of an adventure and if the players deviate in any way they get pissed), the dmpc dm (has thier own pc in the group and for some reason thier character seems to find all the loot and is the only one that can use it), the sexist dm (for some reason treats the ladies at the table less than), just a few examples of dms I've either personally experienced or have had the unfortunate pleasure of being at the same table with, or horror stories of other players.
Going off of the meta gaming section, why do players try to skip the story/game that is there. "I have this maze, the clues to get through it are...." I cast this so we can fly over it. "What? But I put a lot of....whatever." "The creature emerges, roll initiative..." Actually, can I do an animal handling check, (nat 20), I know how it behaves, so we can tame it and avoid the fight. "But....this is an awesome...and you're all built for combat....fine, if you don't want to fight, you don't fight." But then, they're in town, "There are merchants that sell...." We attack, do we get a surprise round? "Yes...but guards are coming...." We'll fight all the guards. "This was a peaceful town...whatever, roll initiative." Just, players who feel they need to be obstinate and do the opposite of what the story was setting up.
For the cheaters I approach a bit different. I always tell my players I don't care what they roll... They can roll nat20 every time if they so choose, as long as they are having fun. BUT there is a catch. Nat 1s in my games are also super fun and make for an interesting story. So if they wanna ruin the game for themselves, go right ahead... I'm going to be having fun either way
But Cody what do I do when I have someone that power games, someone that rules lawyers, someone that meta games, and someone that hogs the spotlight and injects themself over every roleplay session, at my table and they all sit in the same chair?
I've tried to implement a rule that if you disagree with my ruling bring it up to me after the game. Sadly that hasn't happened and the same player keeps locking the game down to argue. It got so bad last week in what was supposed to be a final battle that it ruined the entire thing and to the DMs credit, wasn't me this time, the fight was awesome except for that player. Its been getting worse and worse to the point I think after 4 years I'm going to leave the group. It's just stopped being fun.
I really like that meta gamers were basically lumped with cheaters... Haha. But 5 is better than 4 in a title block. Meta gamers basically cheat in roleplay and knowledge as compared to cheaters fudging dice. Both can ruin play. I had a meta gaming group that would be split, but when a potential enemy popped up they immediately knew to start to group up. This made a possible social interaction a combat sequence that scared away a lonely enemy.
Great video! here is how I handle these types when they appear on my table (Definitely not the best way, but that is what worked for me): Power Gamer: My own game and world acknowledges your power. There are many STRONG opponents that see how powerful you are and will challenge you specifically. Rules Lawyer: I make clear that one rule beats them all "rules can be shaped on the sake of entertainment" even if you are right and we are wrong, the one rule applies. Spotlight Hog: I like your passion but hate your approach, we will have a chat and we will work it out, I am sure. Meta Gamer: In pen n paper what separates a skilled player from a bad one is mainly the RP. It is abundantly clear to all my players that metagaming is a foul play, you don't play basketball with your feet so don't play as another person with your own knowledge, simple yes? This will be openly called out and if needed penalized. Cheater: You cheat, I cheat. And I am not subtle about it I make it clear. You want to keep playing this game, I can go all night long and I have more tools to cheat than you do.
OK spotlight hog is easy fix, that person wants to be the most visible, when it comes to combat give them the spotlight , let every creature target them and when they either almost die or die then maybe they learn it isn't so much fun to be in the spot light!
Is it cheating or spotlight hogging if one player keeps going to the DM privately to approve his plans first, lets the DM fudge on his behalf because "the DM makes the rules" and has to have his character have boons and "flaws" other players don't exactly like
A few things, I see you... Throwing in 40k references a bit more. Next, you missed one, the I'm only here to hangout person. They distract the other players, disrespect the DM and other players, and hold the group back from getting together with weak excuses for not showing up. I think another is the person who cancels all the time. "Ah, man I can't make it this weekend team, it's my ex girlfriend's dog's 3rd cousins twice removed from his mother's side roommate's birthday... Maybe next month???"
16:11 I was th2le hog in a group with three walls flowers and one murder hobo. Unless I was the face he'd try to be the face and pick a fight with every damn NPC.
Why do you hate the Meta-Gamer, guess you hate chess champions. D&D is a strategy game, that is played with dice and d20 tests. Van Helsing was a great vampire hunter because he studied and learned his quarry. If you are a monster hunter you should learn about your monsters you hunt (as you level). Sam and Dean from Supernatural researched so they could vanquish the evil things, they didn't just wing it!
Nerfing the power gamer's character isn't the solution. That's how they like to play and what they find fun and is most certainly playing by the rules. Outshining other characters really isn't possible unless you are promoting that as the DM and not moving around the spotlight. A power gamer outshining the other players is a shortcoming of the DM and their encounter design. The spotlight is the DM's job. Allowing a player to monopolize it is on the DM. If one character is "too powerful" boost the power of the other characters. A Rules Lawyer is not a cheater. Rules Lawyers are the ones that know all the rules and show off their knowledge by pointing out when anyone else gets it wrong, even to their detriment. A rules lawyer can also be a cheater, but when you don't point out rules for your benefit, that is a cheater, not a rules lawyer. Metagamers are low level cheaters. Roleplay your character more, metagame less. Cheaters, by far and above, are the worst. Picking up dice after rolling, not applying negative effects, reading the module, etc.
I used to be too much of a rules lawyer as a player but then I adopted the following approach: shut up until the DM asks you. It's made a world of difference and now I'm more of a rules assistant.
I don't even argue in favor or against us specifically, I just wanna make the DM aware of the rule in case they are not. I just don't know when to keep my gob shut.
Hi, recovering metagamer here. I’ve been clean for about eight years now. The biggest advice I can give to other meta gamers, is that people love it when you do it right. Know that there’s a trap around the corner? Boldly walk in to it, while declaring how astute at observation you are! Know that enemy is immune to fire? Cast your biggest fireball, then be aghast as it survives! These moments will be far more memorable than you always performing flawlessly, and you will get to continue feeling like the smartest person at the table.
thats such a good lesson I also learned from watching Acquisitions Incorporated play. Every opportunity for meta gaming has a much funnier opportunity for comedy. Just like you said, players can use their meta knowledge to turn their characters lack of knowledge into the funniest thing of the session (of course, if the general mood of the session permits it)
I'm also in the process of trying to stop myself but I'm also the one who has to make the plans/be the one who doesn't dump intelligence so the first step I took was play a class/character who actually knows a lot about things so the accidental blurting out of something feels less metagamey because the character would have good reason to know that too (for example I had a bard who was the younger sister to a whole bunch of adventurers and had heard stories from them that she bases her storytelling off and I had an order of scribes wizard who spends time researching monsters to help them learn to modify the magic they use) then I started having characters who only knew about specific monsters (e.g. rangers with favoured enemies) and asking if my characters would reasonably know about something (like a recent instance where we were told we were going to fight rot grubs and I asked if my ranger with beasts as the favoured enemy would know that they needed to be burnt off to avoid them burrowing)
As DM, I learned that if I need a rule looked up, I ask my rules lawyer player. It gives him that serotonin rush he wants and gets the info I need fast, since he usually knows where to find it. He’s also learned to ask “can I ask a question about the rule now or wait till later?” It gives me the option and sometimes I’m fine with talking about it in game, especially if the consequences are dire.
Re: rules lawyer. You get to bring up your opinion once at the table. You get one appeal after the decision is made. After that, any further discussion takes place after the game. Also, all decisions made in the moment do not obligate the DM to make that one off decision a permanent feature of the game.
Agreed. I’ve said a handful of times when we’re unsure whether or not something is a “legal move” that “I’ll allow it this time, but let’s look in the books later and I may rule differently next time.”
thank you so much for the part at 10:35 I admit that I borderline on rules lawyering a lot. I play with a lot of people that don't really look into the rules, so when a topic comes up, I usually know what the books say, they don't. What I try to do in these cases, when playing online, is I message the official rule to the dm, so they can decide whether they want to follow it or not, or when a dm hesitates in the session and says "I need to think about this", I like to bring forward what the consensus on the thing is - and most of those friends who don't know a lot of rules actually asked me if I know what the official ruling is in multiple cases. I had another player once be like "I didn't ask you, I asked the dm" in a *really* bitchy voice, and that honestly made me so incredibly insecure. Yes, the dm makes the final call, I am on board with that, but what is so bad about telling the dm what the official ruling is if they are unsure and hesitating on their call? I though that might help with deciding whether they want to follow it or not. I would get it if I was pressing to follow that ruling only, or if I was doing it openly all the time. But that just really urked me. I know, rules lawyering is annoying for others, so I keep it to myself and private conversations with the dm in 95% of the cases, but cmon, I also expect the game I play to actually be the game I play. Let me bring forward an official rule if the dm doesn't call a ruling, without any attachments of "it has to be like that".
I have a player like you. I treasure him. If I forget what the official rule/ruling is on a thing, he knows it, or knows where to find it a few minutes. It's really useful when I have umpteen different things going on. There's nothing wrong with knowing the rules. There's nothing wrong with informing the DM of the rules. You are not a "rules lawyer" unless you **argue** about what the rules are with the DM. You're fine.
100% . The method I've adopted is, "The book says..." or "Jeremy Crawford said..." and leave the fact on the table to be used or ignored. As you said, "without any attachments of 'it has to be like that'."
I honestly love these to check my own behavior against. So thank you! I try to be hyper aware of hogging the RP as the only player at our table who super enjoys it? So I appreciate ideas on how to check myself and encourage the others too. Much appreciation :)
One thing if someone is a power gamer that I’ve found to be a good solution. Be support. There are a lot of really powerful optimal builds that are support/control, and these can make the other characters feel important and useful, while the power gamer knows that they are really the one making the difference. Treantmonks God Mage video is a really good example of this. Other point is that the worst player, worse than any of these are the players that bully harass or make fun of other players at the table for roleplaying or experimenting.
I think you missed one... "That guy". This is similar to the spotlight hog (with a sprinkling of the others), but the toxicity is turned up to another level. They never want to take a backseat in any encounter. Every plan needs to be theirs. Their abilities need to be the answer to everything. And when they don't get their way, they pout. They complain. And they make the session unenjoyable for everyone else. The most popular example of this - Orion Acaba
I agree that cheaters shouldn't be on the list because it's just a given. Boot them. For my list, my #4 would be the Tantrum Thrower. They're the ones who pout and cross their arms, saying "I don't know why I even play" when you say "no" or try to reason with them when they throw out the most convoluted and ridiculous game plan. It's not even in the same plane of existence as a Matt Mercer "You can certainly try." It's just not going to happen, and the suggestion itself made you feel like you lost a few IQ points. But those people thought it was perfectly sound, and now they're pouting like a toddler, crossing their arms, and sitting away from you. They might even get up and leave the table to go play on their phone for a while because all you'll do is criticize them if they keep playing, and maybe they'll just go home instead. If they're really upset, they'll hop around and use their whiny voice. For me, that Tantrum Thrower was also the Power Gamer AND was the Spotlight Hog. It was really bad.
If you accuse someone of cheating be 110% sure they actually cheated please. It really hurts to be accused when you actually didn’t cheat you weren’t fudging those perception rolls you just had a + 7 and no one thought to check
You don’t bring a separate dice bag of uncouth dice, just in case someone asks to borrow some? In the words of Wild Bill Hickcock…shouldn’t touch another man’s dice.
I am the power gamer… Though I make a cool character concept first, then make something wildly powerful with the concept I made (such as, say, an Eladrin bard with a sword that contains the soul of his great great Archfey grandfather, the build being a Hexblade 5/Swords Bard 6 with Darkness+Devil’s Sight+Elven Accuracy+Double Bladed Scimitar). This lets the DMs I play with throw some crazy stuff at the party (which I can generally help the party deal with very well). I’m also a Rules Lawyer, and I say stuff that goes in the party’s favor *and* bane (such as when my character I had played for about 2 years died, and the battle had ended which means they shouldn’t be able to be revived [RAW, in the specific OSR system], I just told everybody that they died fair and square, and that a med kit just shouldn’t be able to get used RAW).
I'm surprised we didn't see like "The Constantly Distracted Player" that's never really at the session even when they're physically present. No matter how much you try to involve them, you can't because they don't know what's going on and haven't been paying attention to any of the context for their situation.
Thank you for taking the time to choose sponsors who make products that TTRPG’ers are actually likely to be interested in. That sounds shill-y but I really really appreciate the effort that goes into selecting products. That Army Painter kit is going to be a perfect Christmas present for a few of my players (and maybe get them to paint their minis). :)
Maybe it's because what my brother always played but I hate the tragic backstory lonewolf character. The indifference and lack of trust just feels like they would rather be doing something else.
I was a bit of a spotlight hog in one of those "everyone else is a wallflower" games where it felt like even the DM was a wallflower. Pulling others into the spotlight to give them a chance to shine forces them to interact with the story/scene. They might just be new to the whole tabletop scene, so as a spotlight hog you should be trying to set up situations that the other PCs would naturally set up at so that the players will get used to stepping up without having to be provoked.
I was too, and also in a party that wanted to leave every room instantly without looking beyond what the DM described, nothing I seemed to do would make the others want to RP and interact more despite my repeatedly ending up a spotlight hog by being the one to check the bookshelves for hidden spell books, or look for secret doors and the checks resulting in many secret doors being found. Grant it for 2 of the 5 players it was their first game, but even with talking to them between games they just did not want to actually interact with the environment in the game.
Cody, great video…but you’re wrong. The worst players are the ones that are none of these. The ones who don’t know the rules, don’t know their character, don’t take notes, don’t know what’s going on in the game, and wouldn’t think to try to fudge a roll because they JUST. DON’T. CARE. Yeah, all of the above you listed are sins - ones we are all likely guilty of to some degree at some time in our gaming lives. But the players who have never done any of these…I’d take any one of the above over them. Why? Because they are redeemable, and *want* to play the game. That dude who asked the GM to make them a character that they then never read, and watch sportsball on their device while the party is a life-or-death battle with the BBEG? They are the worst.
Finally.....these lists of worst players and DMs are silly. Like you all those flaws are redeemable. But someone who doesn't know how use their shape change as a druid after 11 games is not.
The way I handle spotlight hogs is by finding out what they like about the game and ask them how we can get OTHERS in the game to like it too. Example: I had a spotlight hog who was REALLY into to the roleplaying aspect. We worked together with the idea that others weren't really as engaged and it would make the roleplaying even better for this player if others were also engaged. That alone made it to where the spotlight hog was working to SHARE the spotlight at that point.
The screamer : Whenever they are dealt damage from at least 1 attack. They start panicing because they lost 3 hit points on a total of 58 and they're sure they're going to die.
Im def a power gamer but I don't understand the power gamers who use homebrew content. I like to power game to see what I can do within the system I'm put in. Homebrew takes the fun out of it. But if a dm wants me to not power game (which hasn't happened yet because I play with seasoned veterans who are at best optimizers) then I'll make a fun gimic character who's really good at something useless (like being incredibly good at cooking)
I think it always good for the DM to ask ho your character would know that before assuming meta gaming. You be surprised how many times players have a good in game reason or just go oh shoot your right nvm.
I don't think I've ever used a monster straight from the manual. They always have something added or changed just so "passive meta gaming" is impossible... just ran a werewolf that has electrical powers instead of the bite giving them lycanthropy it paralyzed them
I feel the worst when i wrongly apply some character meccanics, doing more than i should have done. For example when i used "Heart of the Storm" of my Sorcerer, and i COMPLETELY overloocked the range limtation, i was doing like 4 damage to every enemy on the board. When i realised that, it was too late, but to feel better i streight up told the other players that i had done something wrong.
QUESTION: What about DM metagamers? When DM's conspire with one of the group to make sure the slant of the plot or fight go as intended. It's not fun for the other players when they realize this isn't for them and feels preordained, like the other characters don't matter.
Take you DM aside and tell them you feel like you are just spectators instead of players in a TTRPG game. Honestly the best way a player described railroading/having no agency to me.
Question: is it always the same player, or did you possibly misunderstand the DM attempting to give everyone “their time in the spotlight?” The difference is subtle, and the DM’s ability plays a huge factor in how obvious it would look that that’s what’s happening, so a newer, less experienced DM might be trying and giving more attention to a single player because they react most often, and the DM is winging it. Or it could be the DM is trying to slide into that players DMs and it’s a totally bad DM thing to be doing. Or that DM and player are close friends and they don’t care about the group. Or whatever. Thousands of ways to be a bad DM. Nuance, is my point. I’d like more data please. Feel free to not.
@@demonzabrak a new DM, always the same player in spotlight and getting the rewards, rest of group has to sit there and watch, constantly. And DM keeps doing things to exclude the group and focus on the same one player. For some reason, didn't get the update until now. Thanks for commenting!
You forgot the internet trolls for online games. They prey on the fact that dnd is 100% dependent on groups and social interaction. Their only interest is causing discourse in a group.
It's not online only. I have a player whom I have spoken with on a few occasions who basically told me but he likes to cause chaos and trouble for the group and why shouldn't he be allowed to have fun and stuff.
This whole video breaks down into a very simple business principle: Don't hate the player, hate the behavior. Communicate, empathize both for the DM and players and work together to make a better game.
The worst players i've had to deal with are 1. I had player who was constantly trying to screw over the other players by taking items and at times attacking npcs and the party 2. A player who was very indecisive, they didnt do much out of combat, and in combat they took forever to make their next move Any suggestions on how to improve their gameplay? For the first player, I had them get arrested because they were attacking npcs in a heavily guarded city. But I felt like that was very unfair towards the player and the party because they didnt want to go along with that plotline For the second player, I usually would just remind them of the things they could do in combat until they settled on an action, but that could end up feeling like im suggesting exactly what they should do
Hey there! Love your content and can't wait to see more :D I'm a writer and narrative designer in the tabletop and video game industry and I've been thinking about revamping my channel to focus more on tabletop content (as that's what I've been doing freelance for - just worked on NeverEnding's Anansi's Tapestry of Lives Kickstarter) with a perspective from a DM who also writes and designs professionally. I'd love to pick your brains or have a chat about creating TTRPG content for RU-vid as I'm trying to get advice on what/how to do it pretty much.
For Metagamers, I just likr to remind them, also as a player myself. E.g. "Remember: Your character doesn't know that.". That should work most of the time.
You missed "the Wangrod" (a Matt Colville word) - i.e., the toxic player, who is a jerk to the rest of the table (the thief who pick-pockets his own party member; the character who starts killing NPCs the rest of the players are trying to socially interact with; the guy who goes off by himself, wakes the whole dungeon, and brings the entire dungeon down on his party "Leroy Jenkins" style, etc.). This is arguably as bad as or possibly even worse than the Cheater.
Metagamers: for planned encounters I tweak powers, abilities, stats, and spells to accommodate the particulars of the campaign/story that's being explored. Maybe the group is exploring a thick, dark forest full of spider webs and spiders, I'll add a clan of orcs suited for that terrain with freedom of movement capability to navigate and use the webs to suit them, giving them ability boosts in dex instead of str, and poison resist or immunity depending on group level. I'm matching a theme and mood for the story and keeping the players in wonderment at the world, hopefully. For random encounters I usually stick to the defaults in the monster manual, unless I have a better idea on the spot that fits, such as 3-5 wolves for forest terrain and instead use howling spiders with pack tactics instead (to go with the example above). The way I justify it to players that have a problem with it, go to Google Images and search on the word 'dog' and tell me how many pictures show the exact same breed of dog to represent the animal 'dog'. There is variability to species, some are large, some are short, some are fast or slow, etc... monsters are just as variable, minus specific ones like tarrasques or banshees for instance. There are usually lore reasons why they are the way the are and for the most part I'll observe that.
I have a few characters that are pseudo powergamey but that's mostly because I rolled like a god with their stats (one of my favourite characters for roleplay and combat, my half drow gloomstalker, has a dump stat of 12) and apparently I chose insane subclasses (gloomstalker which I chose because it sounded cool and had some slight underdark flavour) but even then they're only somewhat optimised because I love intelligence even if it's kinda rubbish for example my gloomstalker has 12 str, 20 dex, 13 con, 16 or 17 int, 19 wis and 16 or 17 cha (I don't have her character sheet on hand but that's with the half elf +2 moved to dex thanks to Tasha's and +1 in wis and cha because I wanted ranger stats and I kept charisma as a +1 because she's half drow even though girlie's lived in the forest with her half siblings basically her whole life so she's got high charisma but she's also more than happy to let someone else be the face of the party) she's basically a nerd who I've decided can read and write various languages but has poor pronunciation in most (common and elvish are fine because her siblings taught her and thieves' cant is fine because it's speaking in code rather than another language) because she learnt from books rather than someone who can speak the language I've also started role playing her with minor sun sensitivity because I wanted to make her a little less insane and some party members were complaining a bit that she was killing things too quickly (sharpshooter, dread ambusher, extra attack, probable advantage, Hunter's mark*, sneak attack from the one rogue level** which is 4d8 + 3d6* + 1d6** + 45 for an average 77 (53-101) damage assuming all sharpshooter hits and no crits and up to 157 damage (61-157, average 109) if everything crits) ironically I actually made her backstory first then rolled like a god and gave her stats according to the backstory (charisma was partly the half drow natural charisma and also because she totally has her older siblings wrapped around her little finger)
I feel like people who complain about Powergamers and "I read the Rules book" need to show what they mean. I shouldnt have to beg and grovel for knowinf how to play my class. Unless it just cheese plays, screw cheese.
The worst player is a DM who thinks optimization = no RP/story. Our party is literally decked in powerful magical items we earned by being bold and yet our DM can still find a way to whoop our butts. My Mystical Monk has a 27 AC, +8 to concentration saves and can stack disadvantage on all that and he still almost wiped out our party in Tyranny of Dragons. What are these soft DMs excuses?
My favorite meta-gaming that I’ve ever done was using Ice Knife against a monster that I knew was resistant to cold damage. I knew that the monster was resistant, but my character didn’t and I was playing my character! The funny part was when I told the DM that after the session and he said, “I’d forgotten that they were resistant to cold.” So I got the full damage anyway!
If you have one player that is all of these except the cheater? The #1 spot goes to a player that is more than one of these. A rules lawyer alone is almost as bad as a cheater, it’s like 1A & 1B. I don’t really mind an optimized/power build, but mix that with meta-gaming, and telling other players what to do with their turns makes me want to just shut down a game.
• the problem with the lonely Power Gamer is that, if you wanna make the game fun for them, you might have a TPK, as all other PCs will die. either we have a Powergaming party or a party with a PC that's just above the curve. • having a player who you cab defer most questionable rulings to, or who can give you advice if you don't kniw what to do is a blessing; having a "rules for me, not for thee" cheater is a curse.
For metagamers a tip and trust me on this it's *VERY* fun. Consider what your character knows. I once knew something about a module but my character would have presumed something else based on the information available at that time. He made a choice *I* as a player wouldn't because of the knowledge I had. It lead to a very interesting side path that neither I nor the GM was expecting because of how the group built off the faulty information of the character and ended up being a lot of fun.
I think I fall into the rules lawyer subclass, "The Bookkeeper" I like keeping track of game states, and bringing up rules that aren't known, sharing spell effects, or weapon effects. I don't ever argue if something isn't played RAW. Just as a DM myself know it's hard to have everything on hand or know every rule. So I just share what I can so no one has to waste time looking up things. Also multiclassed into the power gamer subclass "Best Of The Worst" I like to find weird things to optimize just to see how good I can make something that is bad. But I try to not multiclass build with more than 2 classes and anything I actually play in a game, I make sure it has backstory reasons why the classes and abilities were taken.
If you want to metagame, then take your metagaming and remove the "meta" part. Give a good reason your CHARACTER knows the information. Often you can give a good in-character reason for knowing things about monsters like resistances, weaknesses, types of attacks, or general features (such as what types of movement a monster has, if their AC, speed, or total health is comparatively high or comparatively low). For example: wizards may have learned about a type of monsters as a part of their studies, barbarians may have fought some strange monsters in a coliseum as a gladiator, bards might be traveling storytellers and know a story of a hero fighting a given kind of monster, etc. However, if you can't justify having the knowledge in character, don't tell the other players the information.
Metagaming curbing 101 - OK Player tell me how your character knows this. Oh I just know it so wanted to make sure everyone....Ok roll me a 1d100 and 1d10. 42 and 10....Your character babbles for the next 10 minutes incapable of speech as they peer into a world they have never seen before, one of knowledge beyond their comprehension, They then feel as if their vocal chords are no longer their own as they tell the rest of the party that X is immune to Y even though they have never encountered one before. (I make my players aware of this beforehand) Next time it is long term. Some try to pretend their character would know for x or y reasons and if it seems well thought out or legit I let it slide otherwise Percentage chance that they would know based on back story, history and rarity of creature.
So, I have a confession to make - I'm a Cheater in recovery. I know it's bull and perverting the game. I do. But - and to be clear, I am not trying to make excuses, I'm trying to explain - I didn't and don't do it because I'm trying to "win" or showboat or whatever. I did it because of a crippling fear of failure. I've been the loser and the disappointment all my life, and gaming is the one way I have to be successful. I am in constant fear that I'm going to be the drag factor that makes the party fail, thereby becoming the failure and disappointment again. I've been working for a literal decade to overcome this, and am mostly over it now. I'll still occasionally fudge character creation rolls, just so I'm less likely to be the aforementioned drag factor. But I'm still working on it. So if you've made it to the end of my wall of text and still have sympathy, just bare in mind - not all of us are unredeemable. If we put in honest effort to work on ourselves, maybe help us work on it together?
100% i play a cleric5 fight dip 1 and i managed to get 25 BASE AC….. i was basicly our tank now however the DM Droped a shield of missiles i took and now i am rear player using ranged and shielding the party from missles allowing the ranger to bow the monsters past my range from shield… granting everyone a AC25. from ranged attacks
Do I like to optimize? Hell yeah. Does it feel good to have a 27% chance to crit for an average of 216 damage? Uh huh. Is that the optimized, most effective tactic available for all situations? No, ew, who wants that? We care about fun, not usefulness.
I have a call for aid for the Spotlight Hog. I’m playing in a D&D campaign and have unintentionally become the “main character”. It’s to the point where the party defers to me/my character for overall party/plot decisions, one player requested to kill off their character to create a new one that respects/follows my character, and three players have said they honestly just want to watch what my character does. I’ve tried to remove my character from the decision making process multiple times by having him leave the room/area, do something stupid (I have an 8 Int), or just blatantly say “I’ll go with whatever you all decide”. I’ve also talked with the other players and told them that I’m satisfied with my character’s development arc, so if the party wants to go a direction that opposes the morals of my character then I’m more than happy to play a new character and let them either kick out or kill my old character. But the other players and the DM have said they view my character as the main character and enjoy watching what I do and then joining in themselves. It seems like I’m the only one who doesn’t like this arrangement. How would you recommend handling this? I’m still having fun and so are the other players. Should I just get over myself and embrace this since the campaign is almost over?
I don't prefer the term "cheater". I prefer "dice fudger". I mean, come on. We've all had those sessions where the dice just aren't cooperating. You're completely ineffective in combat, you're blowing all your skill checks, and you're at the bottom of the initiative order every time. You're not having fun and you just want something to go *right* for a change. In that instance, sometimes I can see overruling a dice roll with your own result. It sucks to feel like you're not contributing.
For Power Gamers, I limit what's available to use to official sources only and only those I have access to/have reviewed For Rules lawyers, I listen to them and if what they say makes sense and won't break the game I consider it, but I'm firm that I'm the one who is in charge of the rules and will shoot down whatever I think will not help the game, official ruling or no. For spotlight hogs or even when it's just wallflower players, I address the players directly to make sure everybody gets a say. Sometimes people are okay with one person taking a leadership role and if everyone is happy I let it be. For metagamers, I don't allow them to take actions unless they have an in character explaination. I often change monster stats and weaknesses so that usually isn't an issue. For Cheaters, all rolls must be visible to me and left on the table to be counted. If digitally players can only roll when I call for it, and for 'accident' rolls I just take whatever the d20 roll was and add proper modifiers, never allow a reroll. For all of them though, I always try to talk to the problem player first. Most times that solves the problem.
I have the problem, that I become an unwanted rule lawyer at the table, when the GM is actually not prepared or doesn't know the rules. Because he gives regulary advantage to players they don't possess. (Give them class features of other classes or even legendary weapons (self designed and.not aware that they possess legendary weapons stats and do not see the problem) Or disadvantage to other players because he didn't know that their character had that skill, which would end a fight or a puzzle. Or he even denies spells for example suggestion, because he doesn't like how the spell works and denies it regularly and say don't use this kind of spells, it distroys my game. That makes it sometimes really hard to stay motivated as a player and triggers my inner rules lawyer. How would you handle the situation?
The player PvPer despite it not being that kind of game, the lone wolf that constantly has to be pulled into group activities and/or complains about not being in them, the butthole bc their character would do it players.......its tough to make just a top 5 to be sure. Just don't think I would put power gamer above these ones.
Role playing/acting is improv, how can cheating happen? Cheating on happens if the game is based on rules, and dice test. Your games sound more like organized theatre. I prefer a good dungeon crawl D&D game and honestly feel I would not enjoy your game since you rely more on role playing and storytelling. I like a game that is more structured and less woke.
Rules have there place in the game. If you don't have rules you just have chaos! Might as well just let everyone wander off in multiple directions. I can't believe you think rule lawyers are the problem, without rules there is no society! Great lets play cards and one person is playing "Go Fish" while another is playing bridge just doesn't work! OK so no rules, so need to listen to the DM, what makes him in charge, oh wait it is in the rules that he is the game master and is the story teller who controls all the npcs and directs the game. You can't direct the game without rules.
as a powergamer in denial (im clean, when it comes to ebberon backgrounds now so getting better :D) ruleslawyer turned on demand RAW library and somebody in dire fear of being a spotlight hog (im playing a paladin, lets face it, its the class that does it the most i feel) i appriciate this video :D how about a top 5 for the Best players too?
What about ‘Loot Hogs’? Players that abandon the encounter so that they can be the first to claim the loot. Once in possession they become a Gollum holding and controlling their precious prize and all other PCs better keep their hands off and their opinions to themselves. I refuse to play with players like this. I personally think Loot Hogs are worse than Meta Gammers; at least that person is trying to synergies with the Party.
Cheater aside, they are all amped up versions of good. Folks should know the rules, be keen to take part, be thinking out strategy. I think the trick is to ask them to "make it fun for everyone". So metagamer, put yourself in the wrong spot; rules lawyer, help if you are asked; spotlight hog, shine the light elsewhere.
I don’t have a problem with power gamers, rules lawyers, or mete gamers. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to play a competent character. D&D characters are supposed to be badass heroes. Knowing the rules is also a good thing. I find players that don’t know the rules at all more disruptive than people that do. In a game that has rules its impossible not to metagame. Knowing that a monster is immune to fire and then casting fireball at it does not make for better storytelling, its just frustrating.
As a DM don't show the whole battle map until you feel they do get to see the things. If monster's are still hidden don't confuse the meta-gamer with things they see. I don't play a meta-gamer if I am first level I make foolish mistakes that sometimes kills the party because a a newb you do that but as I level my character learns things. If I play a ranger and I have specialized in hunting trolls as I level I learn and therefore know what the basic troll stats are. I was in the military and as I progressed in rank and training, I learned where to expect ambushes, an adventure should also be able to make good decisions. So if 5ht lvl druid sees something blocking the road like a turned over wagon and chooses to to cast entangle in the tree line that's could be ideal for hiding an ambush. Or a caster who is a CN or even Evil decides to cast produce flame and start to hurl fire in like it was calling in Napalm to remove the foliage. Cantrips are cheap and easy.
There's a 6th type - the Disruptor. He's the player who plays the game against the other players or despite the other players. Against the other players means to steal from party members, take party loot for himself, cast AoE spells not caring it will affect party members, when the party has a plan this player refuses to do the thing he was supposed to do, attack when the party is talking to the NPC. Despite the other players is similar to the Spotlight Stealer, but he's not really hogging the game. He's playing by himself. He'll leave the party to do his own exploring doing stuff by passing secret notes with the DM. When he learns important information he will never tell the party what he learns. When the party gets into a combat or has to deal with a trap he'll sit smugly because his character is not there. After a couple of rounds then he says he'll rejoin the party so he can pompously save them from their foolishness. If the combat goes badly he's the first to run away. Going badly can also mean he either lost a hit point or at best a quarter of his hit points. He does not help other party members retreat. He is likely not to tell the other players what his class is, his character's name, not even his race.
