This is how normal people game.

[Angelmaker]

What a load of BS. "Normal poeple" my ass.

The only gamers i have ever met who partook in some sort of suicidal, game disrupting behaviour ever were the weirdos. I can really see some potential in the actions of the guy that sacrificed himself with the TNT, as in "I am not going back to jail. Ill take em down.". Really think thats cool.

But the rest? Outright weird.

By his definition psychopathical behaviour is the new normal. No well adjusted, caring individual would commit seppuku or blow up a town wall after fighting that hard to save the town. It just makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

Dont know what went wrong there, but thanks for sharing. Was a good read. Just sorry ti hear it went wrong.

[Amphetryon]

As noted up-thread, the POV of another person who was present at this game might be illuminating.

What seems like a reasonable course of action from behind the GM screen may well appear to be Character suicide, or even a TPK, from the POV of the Players.

If, in your experience, Players making jokes and otherwise talking out of Character at times is atypical, bad gaming behavior at the gaming table, I can only say that my personal experiences since I first started in the hobby would qualify as exclusively atypical and bad gaming behavior, by that metric.

[Gravitron5000]

He has heard most of my past gaming horror stories, and as a result he was using them as ammunition to look extra smug and self righteous.

Instead, he made himself the subject of your newest horror story.

[1337 b4k4]

I can't tell if people are using "friend" (in quotes) to imply that this person is not a friend or to imply that they're rolling for disbelief of said person existing.

Despite my generally optimistic outlook, I use the quotes because IME, friends don't invite you from hours away to come game and then go take a nap for 4 hours. Regardless of whether miscommunication took place or not, it's clear that this "friend" at least doesn't seem to value Talakeal's time. Inviting someone from out of town and then intentionally and purposefully abandoning them to their own devices to nap (especially when you could have been napping while they were driving from out of town) is a bit of a **** move.

[DontEatRawHagis]

I'll have to agree that the people I game with can be a bit distracted in game, but have fun. I mean I make a reference to TV SHOWS and MOVIES every session. One of my groups is filled with "socially normal" people and another I would say a bit abnormal.

I mean we are all social, it's just one group has about 4 socially awkward people as opposed to 2.

Freaks is a strong word, but after playing in organized play events I can say my friends are mild by comparison to some people. I used to try to use my DND games to help people get out of their shells and be social, but it was tough.

One of my previous players is a stone's throw away from getting a restraining order from a friend of mine. and I wish I could have helped him understand "she's just not into him".

[SowZ]

Jeez. I once again sympathize with your inability to find reasonable gamers. If you lived in like, Raton or something, I'd say your free to come up to Colorado if you ever want a normal session.

Question. When was the last time you had a game group that you felt comfortable in without such bizarre players? I must admit, I don't know if I'd have the endurance to keep up with the hobby consistently if I'd had so many strange gaming experiences.

[1337 b4k4]

So another point in the "miscommunication" column. Talakeal, in this thread, you say your friend accused you of being a killer DM. In the high lethality thread, you say he accused you of not being "hard core" enough for not punishing the players more. Generally speaking these two statements are at odds with one another. Can you clarify at all how your friend was holding the simultaneous position that you're a killer DM and your not punishing enough?

[Tengu_temp]

I didn't know there are tabletop RPG players who use the "excuse me for having a life" excuse. I thought it's just MMO and FPS gamers. Using this phrase is a surefire sign of telling an *******, in any case.

Question. When was the last time you had a game group that you felt comfortable in without such bizarre players? I must admit, I don't know if I'd have the endurance to keep up with the hobby consistently if I'd had so many strange gaming experiences.

Honestly, with how often Talakeal has horror stories to tell us, sometimes I get the feeling he's just making all of it up. But if that's true then he must have pretty rich imagination.
Either that, or he's the unluckiest gamer on Earth. At least in terms of frequency; That Lanky Bugger still wins in terms of intensity, considering he got stabbed over a game.

[SowZ]

So another point in the "miscommunication" column. Talakeal, in this thread, you say your friend accused you of being a killer DM. In the high lethality thread, you say he accused you of not being "hard core" enough for not punishing the players more. Generally speaking these two statements are at odds with one another. Can you clarify at all how your friend was holding the simultaneous position that you're a killer DM and your not punishing enough?

Are you positive they are the same people?

[Solaris]

I didn't know there are tabletop RPG players who use the "excuse me for having a life" excuse. I thought it's just MMO and FPS gamers. Using this phrase is a surefire sign of telling an *******, in any case.

I've encountered it only once, with my previous DM who was upset I called him out on several socially maladjusted behaviors both he and his friend engaged in while under my roof.
I don't game with *******s; I don't game with him anymore.

Talakeal's pretty much the patron saint of "No gaming is better than bad gaming".

[Talakeal]

Now that I think of it, this isn't the first time something like this has happened. The first time I ran a game for his group one of his cousins played with us, and couldn't take anything seriously. Like, at all. As in not a single thing he said the entire session wasn't a joke, and after the game when he gave his character sheet back I saw that he had written jokes all over it. I felt that he had crossed the line from laughing with me to laughing at me, and I felt like he was being disrespectful.* Having him at the table kind of felt like when I used to play at the rec room at school and members of the football team would come over and join in the game, but they weren't actually interested, they were just there to troll us and make fun us.

He got a new job and didn't show up to anymore sessions. After one game I told my friend something along the lines of:

"I am sorry to say it, but I am actually kind of glad your cousin couldn't make it. I seriously considered not even showing up again because of the way he made me feel." He asked me for some explanation and I told him the above.

His response was "Ah, I see what's going on here. So he didn't do anything wrong, he is just a normal person and a great guy, but because you have been traumatized by jocks in the past you are now hyper sensitive to anyone who makes light of your games."


*: Note that I am absolutely not the type of person who feels "disrespected". I have a visual disorder which means I don't look people in the eyes, and have been yelled at for not "respecting" people my whole life, and frankly I think the whole concept is kind of ridiculous. This is just about the only time in my entire life when I have felt disrespected.

So another point in the "miscommunication" column. Talakeal, in this thread, you say your friend accused you of being a killer DM. In the high lethality thread, you say he accused you of not being "hard core" enough for not punishing the players more. Generally speaking these two statements are at odds with one another. Can you clarify at all how your friend was holding the simultaneous position that you're a killer DM and your not punishing enough?

On the drive to the game he was giving me a lecture about how soft I was and how he had learned that you needed to be a hard ass and kill their characters to get them to respect the game.

On the drive home he said something to the effect of "See, you are a killer DM. All that stuff you said earlier was just a bunch of BS."

As noted up-thread, the POV of another person who was present at this game might be illuminating.

What seems like a reasonable course of action from behind the GM screen may well appear to be Character suicide, or even a TPK, from the POV of the Players.

If, in your experience, Players making jokes and otherwise talking out of Character at times is atypical, bad gaming behavior at the gaming table, I can only say that my personal experiences since I first started in the hobby would qualify as exclusively atypical and bad gaming behavior, by that metric.

Joking is fine, and being distracted with cell phones and youtube is tolerable. The problem in this case is that they were giving me pressure to hurry up and get the game over with so they could play D&D but still spent more than half their time making jokes which caused the game to draw out excessively.

I support the above argument.

In fact, I believe the "friend" above has actually sabotaged Talakeal from the start, and he never wanted the game to conclude. Below are my guesses of what could have happened, based on a single account of the game. (I could well be wrong.)

- I am guessing the "friend" was the one who invited Talakeal on behalf of his gaming friends, even though he didn't really want to himself. (He was just picked because he knew Talakeal longest.)
- The "friend" admitted he did not want to spend more than 2-3 hours on this western zombie game, and then proceeds to sleep for 4 hours.
- The "friend" also mentioned that the other players wanted to play their regular D&D game after the zombie game concluded. His nap made that impossible, but he proceeded to sleep anyway.
- Because Talakeal and the "friend" arrived four hours late at the comic store, the other players had already been bored and annoyed for four hours.
- After the zombie game ended, there was no more time for the D&D campaign, because it was already so late.
- I am guessing that afterwards, the "friend" blamed Talakeal for everything: the four-hour delay, the boredom, and the fact that the D&D game had to be canceled. Oh, and he also said that he didn't enjoy the zombie game. He probably found the others in agreement on all those points.
- Finally, the "friend" proceeds to call Talakeal and tells him the game was bad, that Talakeal is crazy, and that "nobody wants Talakeal to play with them again". Note that him saying "everybody says so" does not necessarily mean that he actually talked about it with anyone, he could just be inflating his own opinion.

Short version:
The "friend" did not want Talakeal to come over, but somehow could not get out of it. He then proceeded to make Talakeal look bad to the other players, and made sure that Talakeal would not be coming back in the future.

What could Talakeal have done differently?
- If Talakeal had turned back after the first phone call (in which the "friend" informed him of only wanting a 2-3 hour game), the "friend" would have told the other players that Talakeal had blown them off and is a jerk.
- If Talakeal had chosen not to wait for 4 hours during the nap, and gone home, see above.
- If Talakeal had gone ahead to the comic store while the "friend" napped, he could have apologized on behalf of the "friend", and the group could have done something else to pass the time. The "friend" would have been furious, but the other gamers would not blame Talakeal.
- Upon arriving 4 hours late, Talakeal could have made it very clear that it was not his own fault, but rather the "friend"'s sleep-deprivedness. Apologies would have to be made. Talakeal should also have checked with the other players if they were still up for any game at all.
- During the game with all the distractions, Talakeal could have asked the players if anything was wrong, and if they were in the right mood for this game, and then proposed to do something else if nobody was enjoying themselves.
- During the phonecall after the game had ended, Talakeal could have told the "friend" that he was being unfair, and told the "friend" that he was to blame for the fiasco, and he knew it. And probably hung up if the rant continued after that. ("I don't have to listen to this. Bye. [click]")

At this stage, there is probably nothing that can be done. The situation has already played itself out. The gaming group is a lost cause, at least for Talakeal.
There is only one thing that Talakeal can still do, and that is to contact the "friend" one more time, to calmly explain that he felt the "friend" was entirely unfair, that taking a four-hour nap during game time while the other players were already waiting was what ruined the game, and that blaming that on Talakeal is not what friends do. If the "friend" apologises, then at least the friendship can be salvaged (and it probably wasn't even intentional, just carelessness). If not, I would advise to exclude the "friend" from any future games and to cut off all contact.

It wasn't at a comic store, it was at his sister's house. The other players are all part of his extended family and I don't know any of them except through him, so me going by myself would have been pretty awkward.

The last game session seemed to go so well though, and they all told me they were having fun, that it never occurred to me that they just didn't like the game.

Although, honestly, I think when we have such a limited time to play and such a long commute I am probably not on the top of my game, and it does feel a little more like "business" rather than "fun."

I didn't know there are tabletop RPG players who use the "excuse me for having a life" excuse. I thought it's just MMO and FPS gamers. Using this phrase is a surefire sign of telling an *******, in any case.



Honestly, with how often Talakeal has horror stories to tell us, sometimes I get the feeling he's just making all of it up. But if that's true then he must have pretty rich imagination.
Either that, or he's the unluckiest gamer on Earth. At least in terms of frequency; That Lanky Bugger still wins in terms of intensity, considering he got stabbed over a game.

As I have said before, sometimes I wish I was making it up, but I am not. I am seriously passionate about the hobby and don't have a lot else going on in my life, so I put up with a lot more than most people. And even with all the crap I still enjoy myself more often than not. This session was one of the nots.

Also, Lanky Bugger wasn't really stabbed over gaming, it was more of an adultery / relationship issue that just happened to be set at the gaming table. Frankly, imo, although I recognize that no one ever deserves to be stabbed, if that story is accurate he had it coming just about as much as anyone could. Although I understand there is some debate over whether the third story was even his, and his first two stories certainly rank right up there with anything I have ever experienced.

[Jornophelanthas]

Now this isn't the first time something like this has happened. The first time I ran a game for his group one of his cousins played with us, and couldn't take anything seriously. Like, at all. As in not a single thing he said the entire session wasn't a joke, and after the game when he gave his character sheet back I saw that he had written jokes all over it. I felt that he had crossed the line from laughing with me to laughing at me, and I felt like he was being disrespectful.*

He got a new job and didn't show up to anymore sessions. After one game I told my friend something along the lines of:

"I am sorry to say it, but I am actually kind of glad your cousin couldn't make it. I seriously considered not even showing up again because of the way he made me feel." He asked me for some explanation and I said the above + "Having him at the table kind of felt like when I used to play at the rec room at school and members of the football team would come over and join in the game, but they weren't actually interested, they were just there to troll us and make fun us."

His response was "Ah, I see what's going on here. So he didn't do anything wrong, he is just a normal person and a great guy, but because you have been traumatized by jocks in the past you are now hyper sensitive to anyone who makes light of your games."

I think this anecdote illustrates a lot about the "friend". He misunderstands your explanation because he jumps to conclusions about you, and he does not take your concerns seriously as a result. His reasoning apparently goes that being "normal" implies being right. And since his cousin is such "a normal guy", and you apparently are not, the cousin cannot be at fault.
Which is also why he places the blame for the failed game session squarely on you: the other players (including himself) are all "normal", so they can do no wrong. His obvious conclusion: you haven't been "normal" enough for everyone's tastes.

Has this "friend" shown other signs of feeling superior to you in the past? In your way of describing him, he comes across as a very patronizing person, who considers the friendship to be his special favour to you. (Which could be why believes he owes you little respect - after all, he finds it perfectly acceptable to keep you waiting for four hours while he went to sleep.)

[Sith_Happens]

"I am sorry to say it, but I am actually kind of glad your cousin couldn't make it. I seriously considered not even showing up again because of the way he made me feel." He asked me for some explanation and I told him the above.

His response was "Ah, I see what's going on here. So he didn't do anything wrong, he is just a normal person and a great guy, but because you have been traumatized by jocks in the past you are now hyper sensitive to anyone who makes light of your games."

Wow. That is legitimately one of the most dismissive and condescending things I have ever heard or read in my life.

[Maglubiyet]

You deserve better friends than this, Talakeal. The fact that he's so dismissive of your point of view, because he sees himself as "normal" and you apparently as not, says volumes about his feelings about your relationship.

Friendship is give and take, not just someone using another person. You drove 400 miles round trip to run a game for him and his extended family. You waited for four hours while he took a nap. What has he done for you that makes him worth the sacrifice?

[D+1]

The first job of everyone playing the game, the point of the exercise, is to enjoy it. If you're not having fun why are you there? If you're not having fun, try to do something constructive about it. Don’t be disruptive in the name of finding something to do, but don’t expect someone else to come along and inflict fun upon you either. Your participation is a desired, even necessary component and you're not here just to be passively entertained. The worst thing a player can do is to do nothing.

Communicate! Even though you may think it's very obvious the DM might not know you aren't having fun unless you say something. DM's also don’t have to put up with not enjoying the experience either. Nobody can force you to run a game, and if players are unappreciative of the sacrifices a DM makes they don’t deserve to be rewarded with the fruit of your efforts. If you have a problem then say so. You can read online every week about another campaign blowing up (or about to) which can ALWAYS be traced to the fact that nobody spoke up before it festered into a truly destructive problem.0

If the characters ignore in-game or out-of-game warnings about dangers to their characters then the DM is then justified in applying what he actually knows to be lethal force in an encounter. Still doesn't mean he should, but it can’t really be held against him if he does. It also means that players are doing themselves no favors by never retreating or backing down and always pushing mindlessly for victory in a fight, because this leaves the DM with no options except mindlessly pushing back.

Assist the host and/or DM in getting others to respect the Table Rules as well as yourself. Be on time. Many people have limited hours to devote to the game so don't waste it for them. If you will be late or can't make the game let people know. Bring the things you need to bring (dice, character sheets, players handbook, etc.) and be ready to play when you arrive without wasting time.

Communication flows both ways and the DM does not need to act as though players should be forbidden to ever know what goes on in a DM's mind or behind the DM shield. When a DM makes rulings there is no reason not to freely explain why he rules as he does unless there is in-game information involved that PC's should not be privy to.

- All the above are taken whole or in part from my "D&D Manifesto" http://home.earthlink.net/~duanevp/dnd/manifesto.htm

While acknowledging that someone else's side of the story might be different, regarding the events related in this thread I'd add the following: If you need to drive hundreds of miles to get to the game which YOU are going to be running you need to be able to recognize red flags like, "We also want to reserve time for our regular D&D game today, so wrap it up quick." Um... No. If you want me to drive hundreds of miles then ALL participants will be ready willing and able to participate, ON TIME, and if you want to reserve time for playing another game entirely in addition to me being there to run MY game, then SET THAT TIME. I'll abide by it, or you can realize that as a group you need to just bite that bullet and reschedule one or the other of the games.

If I don't have direct communication avenues to all the players I cannot and will not be held responsible, by any or all of you, for what happens when I rely on "friend" to escort me to the game, but he decides to sleep for 4 hours (which is extraordinarily rude if "friend" doesn't first communicate to other participants that the game start will be delayed and WHY it is delayed. If players also want to dump the game FOR WHATEVER REASON (whether it's that they're just not into the zombie apocalypse thing tonight, or they'd just rather be sure that they can get their regular D&D game in) then it is rude and disrespectful to subvert and undermine it with pressures of, "Let's get this over with so we can do what we REALLY want to do." After all, I had to make a significant commitment of time, effort, MONEY in order to be here BY INVITATION. I get to have fun here too, even if I'm running the game, and that means that you don't get to slag the game I showed up to run just because you've got a hot date in mind with another PC. As noted in the manifesto, your participation is a necessary component, as is your willingness to NOT be disruptive.

If "friend" was your only avenue of communication to the other players, but he now says, "Nobody wants to play in YOUR reindeer games anymore," what choice do you have? Write off that game and those players for good. Is your friend still your friend, or was he ever really your friend? I'll get back to that in a sec - because there is still more than one side to be seen...

"Surrender, or else..." What did you expect to happen? Knuckle under and crawl? Hardly the first option players and their hero characters are likely to choose (nor the second, third, fourth...). Fight it out? What evidence did they get that such a choice would succeed? Even if it was just an honest oversight not to consider the PC's possible alternative choices beforehand and what THEIR perspective would be, it's still your job as DM to roll with that punch and somehow make it work. You say it wasn't a railroad - and yet when you faced them with that scenario did you make it LOOK and FEEL as if there were actually decent choices to be made, and not just opting for mad-lemming mode? Even if they were itching to just get it over with, they should have had options that SEEMED like they would be good to choose. And you were told bluntly that you should wrap it up quick so they could get to that other game. What did you then do to accommodate that request? Would the fight against the bounty hunters been a quick and successful end? Did the appearance of the bounty hunters really need to be played out at all, especially given your time pressures? Those are DM decisions that you have to take responsibility for.

And it's one thing to be fairly lax about slagging the game with disruption and inattention when all things are equal - but all things are NOT equal. You're now put out for having wasted time, effort and money to go and run a game for this group - why weren't you put out at the time sufficient to tell them to either shi... fish or cut bait? Yeah, it's rude and so on for players to do this sort of thing - but you acknowledge that it happens. If you choose to tolerate it then you can't go crying about it later. If they're doing weird and stupid things do you REALLY expect it to just stop suddenly and become a night of championship gaming? No, you either accept that the game is a write-off tonight or you stop the game and give them a reality check. "PEOPLE! This is not going well. Do we want to just call this one done? Do we want to put it on the back burner to maybe finish it off some other time - or even expand it? What's going on? Whatever THIS is that you're all doing... it's not working for me. If you tell me you're having a grand ol' time right now we'll keep going but that's not what it seems like from MY chair..."

FAILURE to communicate kills yet ANOTHER D&D game.

And then we come back to Mr. Friend. He says you're a pushover DM. You're also a killer DM. Your game tonight ended badly so you're clearly awful and it's certain nobody likes you, everybody hates you, may as well just go eat worms. Yet, if you're so awful in your friend's opinion why was he inviting you to DM?

Your friend seems to bear much responsibility. The other players bear much responsibility. But the OP sure seems to bear his fair share of responsibility.

[Solaris]

Also, Lanky Bugger wasn't really stabbed over gaming, it was more of an adultery / relationship issue that just happened to be set at the gaming table. Frankly, imo, although I recognize that no one ever deserves to be stabbed, if that story is accurate he had it coming just about as much as anyone could. Although I understand there is some debate over whether the third story was even his, and his first two stories certainly rank right up there with anything I have ever experienced.

I'm more of the opinion that his stabbity ex was excessively, even psychotically, jealous. I had a similar situation (minus stabbing) arise wherein my sister-in-law pitched a fit because my brother jokingly asked if an NPC who had gone missing was hot (as in, he ain't got time for the fugglies). My sister-in-law will react violently to even the slightest perception of infidelity, whether it be based in reality or in her own overactive imagination. Lanky Bugger got stabbed not over adultery, but because his girlfriend didn't like him having flirty female friends (and, you know, she was psycho). A female player running a female character flirting with a male NPC isn't adultery, and neither is a female friend being affectionate with her male friend.
That's rather besides the point of the thread, though.

Oh, and your "friend's" use of the word normal is... nonstandard. For one thing, he seems to think of it as a good thing and a desirable trait. He may be right about its definition, though, as describing a selfish jerk who tramples all over the work and enjoyment of others, but that could just be my cynicism showing itself again.

[Talakeal]

The first job of everyone playing the game, the point of the exercise, is to enjoy it. If you're not having fun why are you there? If you're not having fun, try to do something constructive about it. Don’t be disruptive in the name of finding something to do, but don’t expect someone else to come along and inflict fun upon you either. Your participation is a desired, even necessary component and you're not here just to be passively entertained. The worst thing a player can do is to do nothing.

Communicate! Even though you may think it's very obvious the DM might not know you aren't having fun unless you say something. DM's also don’t have to put up with not enjoying the experience either. Nobody can force you to run a game, and if players are unappreciative of the sacrifices a DM makes they don’t deserve to be rewarded with the fruit of your efforts. If you have a problem then say so. You can read online every week about another campaign blowing up (or about to) which can ALWAYS be traced to the fact that nobody spoke up before it festered into a truly destructive problem.0

If the characters ignore in-game or out-of-game warnings about dangers to their characters then the DM is then justified in applying what he actually knows to be lethal force in an encounter. Still doesn't mean he should, but it can’t really be held against him if he does. It also means that players are doing themselves no favors by never retreating or backing down and always pushing mindlessly for victory in a fight, because this leaves the DM with no options except mindlessly pushing back.

Assist the host and/or DM in getting others to respect the Table Rules as well as yourself. Be on time. Many people have limited hours to devote to the game so don't waste it for them. If you will be late or can't make the game let people know. Bring the things you need to bring (dice, character sheets, players handbook, etc.) and be ready to play when you arrive without wasting time.

Communication flows both ways and the DM does not need to act as though players should be forbidden to ever know what goes on in a DM's mind or behind the DM shield. When a DM makes rulings there is no reason not to freely explain why he rules as he does unless there is in-game information involved that PC's should not be privy to.

- All the above are taken whole or in part from my "D&D Manifesto" http://home.earthlink.net/~duanevp/dnd/manifesto.htm

While acknowledging that someone else's side of the story might be different, regarding the events related in this thread I'd add the following: If you need to drive hundreds of miles to get to the game which YOU are going to be running you need to be able to recognize red flags like, "We also want to reserve time for our regular D&D game today, so wrap it up quick." Um... No. If you want me to drive hundreds of miles then ALL participants will be ready willing and able to participate, ON TIME, and if you want to reserve time for playing another game entirely in addition to me being there to run MY game, then SET THAT TIME. I'll abide by it, or you can realize that as a group you need to just bite that bullet and reschedule one or the other of the games.

If I don't have direct communication avenues to all the players I cannot and will not be held responsible, by any or all of you, for what happens when I rely on "friend" to escort me to the game, but he decides to sleep for 4 hours (which is extraordinarily rude if "friend" doesn't first communicate to other participants that the game start will be delayed and WHY it is delayed. If players also want to dump the game FOR WHATEVER REASON (whether it's that they're just not into the zombie apocalypse thing tonight, or they'd just rather be sure that they can get their regular D&D game in) then it is rude and disrespectful to subvert and undermine it with pressures of, "Let's get this over with so we can do what we REALLY want to do." After all, I had to make a significant commitment of time, effort, MONEY in order to be here BY INVITATION. I get to have fun here too, even if I'm running the game, and that means that you don't get to slag the game I showed up to run just because you've got a hot date in mind with another PC. As noted in the manifesto, your participation is a necessary component, as is your willingness to NOT be disruptive.

If "friend" was your only avenue of communication to the other players, but he now says, "Nobody wants to play in YOUR reindeer games anymore," what choice do you have? Write off that game and those players for good. Is your friend still your friend, or was he ever really your friend? I'll get back to that in a sec - because there is still more than one side to be seen...

"Surrender, or else..." What did you expect to happen? Knuckle under and crawl? Hardly the first option players and their hero characters are likely to choose (nor the second, third, fourth...). Fight it out? What evidence did they get that such a choice would succeed? Even if it was just an honest oversight not to consider the PC's possible alternative choices beforehand and what THEIR perspective would be, it's still your job as DM to roll with that punch and somehow make it work. You say it wasn't a railroad - and yet when you faced them with that scenario did you make it LOOK and FEEL as if there were actually decent choices to be made, and not just opting for mad-lemming mode? Even if they were itching to just get it over with, they should have had options that SEEMED like they would be good to choose. And you were told bluntly that you should wrap it up quick so they could get to that other game. What did you then do to accommodate that request? Would the fight against the bounty hunters been a quick and successful end? Did the appearance of the bounty hunters really need to be played out at all, especially given your time pressures? Those are DM decisions that you have to take responsibility for.

And it's one thing to be fairly lax about slagging the game with disruption and inattention when all things are equal - but all things are NOT equal. You're now put out for having wasted time, effort and money to go and run a game for this group - why weren't you put out at the time sufficient to tell them to either shi... fish or cut bait? Yeah, it's rude and so on for players to do this sort of thing - but you acknowledge that it happens. If you choose to tolerate it then you can't go crying about it later. If they're doing weird and stupid things do you REALLY expect it to just stop suddenly and become a night of championship gaming? No, you either accept that the game is a write-off tonight or you stop the game and give them a reality check. "PEOPLE! This is not going well. Do we want to just call this one done? Do we want to put it on the back burner to maybe finish it off some other time - or even expand it? What's going on? Whatever THIS is that you're all doing... it's not working for me. If you tell me you're having a grand ol' time right now we'll keep going but that's not what it seems like from MY chair..."

FAILURE to communicate kills yet ANOTHER D&D game.

And then we come back to Mr. Friend. He says you're a pushover DM. You're also a killer DM. Your game tonight ended badly so you're clearly awful and it's certain nobody likes you, everybody hates you, may as well just go eat worms. Yet, if you're so awful in your friend's opinion why was he inviting you to DM?

Your friend seems to bear much responsibility. The other players bear much responsibility. But the OP sure seems to bear his fair share of responsibility.

Ok, first off, even if I was the absolute worst DM in the world, what my "friend" said to me after the game was completely uncalled for. He went into the realm of personal attacks and one of the meanest things anyone has ever said to me and I really can't see how I bear the responsibility for that no matter how bad my game was.

But you know what, looking back over the threads I have started in the last year, about half of them were started because this friend has started DMing and now thinks he is god's gift to gaming and handing out judgments from on high. I think I just need to stop taking what he says so seriously, or better yet just stop listening to him altogether.


Now as for the game itself, I wasn't sure they weren't having fun, I don't know these people too well, maybe they were just in a goofy mood. I was told that we were short on time, and I had invested a lot of time and energy in coming out there and preparing for the game, so I didn't feel like stopping the game then and there, and I was a bit too shy to rock the boat with a long conversation about how they are doing it wrong when the problem might have all been in my head.

As for the encounter itself, the bounty hunters were always meant to be the "end boss" of the game, the players new they were coming from the start, and they showed up during the previous fight with the sheriff, not after. Maybe I could have come up with an alternative if given a lot of time to think about alternate resolutions in hindsight, but at the moment I didn't see any, especially when I was told I needed to wrap the game up quickly so they could get back to D&D.

They weren't unbeatable, I ran the exact same adventure for a previous group and they stomped the bounty hunters flat. The only reason it looked like a no win situation is that during the previous fight the players started acting wacky. As I said one guy ran and hid in the corner, the delicate unarmored guy purposefully used himself as a human shield to protect the big tanky guy, the wounded guy jumped into the fiercest fighting, and one guy blew all of his resources on something utterly trivial and irrelevant.

Furthermore, I know player's don't like to surrender, but it isn't completely unreasonable to think it a possibility. I seen plenty of successful "jail break" scenarios from both sides of the screen, and ransom is a fairly common penalty to defeat without death even if it isn't "fun" too lose*. And if they did surrender they wouldn't face prison or execution, but rather a trial by combat, which I would have thought would have made for a fun adventure in the future.

As I said, I was really impressed by this group in the previous session and they told me they were all having a ton of fun, so I was fully hoping up until the last 5 minutes of suicide and insanity that they would want to turn this into an ongoing campaign in the future.

But I am curious how you would handle that situation; if the players did something really stupid right before the "final boss" of an adventure and then went ahead to fight the boss, what would you do? Just have the enemy go *poof* or drop dead of a heart attack rather than fight? If offering surrender and fighting are both now out of the question, I can't really see what's left. The players weren't even willing to negotiate with them.

*Although as the classic Twilight Zone episode pointed out, it is far more fun than a scenario where you always win.

I'm more of the opinion that his stabbity ex was excessively, even psychotically, jealous. I had a similar situation (minus stabbing) arise wherein my sister-in-law pitched a fit because my brother jokingly asked if an NPC who had gone missing was hot (as in, he ain't got time for the fugglies). My sister-in-law will react violently to even the slightest perception of infidelity, whether it be based in reality or in her own overactive imagination. Lanky Bugger got stabbed not over adultery, but because his girlfriend didn't like him having flirty female friends (and, you know, she was psycho). A female player running a female character flirting with a male NPC isn't adultery, and neither is a female friend being affectionate with her male friend.
That's rather besides the point of the thread, though.

Oh, and your "friend's" use of the word normal is... nonstandard. For one thing, he seems to think of it as a good thing and a desirable trait. He may be right about its definition, though, as describing a selfish jerk who tramples all over the work and enjoyment of others, but that could just be my cynicism showing itself again.

Yeah, normal and well adjusted aren't always the same thing.

Ok, just reread Lanky's story. Yeah, he was definitely in the wrong there. Now, I don't ever think it is ok to stab someone, but I would probably do the exact same thing in that situation, his behavior was totally unacceptable. And maybe I am old fashioned, but I consider a superficial stab wound in the heat of the moment to be less offensive than beating a woman who is half your size into unconsciousness while she is trying to apologize.

[1337 b4k4]

But you know what, looking back over the threads I have started in the last year, about half of them were started because this friend has started DMing and now thinks he is god's gift to gaming and handing out judgments from on high. I think I just need to stop taking what he says so seriously, or better yet just stop listening to him altogether.

Seriously? Your threads are almost word for word "how not to game" examples. If this is the same guy that's been inspiring all your most recent threads, then yes, their concept of "normal" is suspect at best and downright fatally wrong at worst. Let me put it to you this way, I wouldn't take any player you've described in any of your threads to know "normal" gaming from a hole in the wall. Your luck with gaming groups is legendary for how awful it's been.

I'm revising my previous advice. Cut off all contact from this one and all your other problematic gamers. You really need a fresh start. Have you considered just going to pickup/encounters games at your FLGS and identifying players you think are cool and recruiting a new group from scratch? It's extra work, but at least the encounters scenarios would let you get a look at how the players behave without making them your DM or DMing for them.

[NichG]

Ok, first off, even if I was the absolute worst DM in the world, what my "friend" said to me after the game was completely uncalled for. He went into the realm of personal attacks and I really can't see how I bear the responsibility for that no matter how bad my game was.

But you know what, looking back over the threads I have started in the last year, about half of them were started because this friend has started DMing and now thinks he is god's gift to gaming and handing out judgments from on high. I think I just need to stop taking what he says so seriously, or better yet just stop listening to him altogether.

Yes, pretty much this.

Now as for the game itself, I wasn't sure they weren't having fun, I don't know these people too well, maybe they were just in a goofy mood. I was told that we were short on time, and I had invested a lot of time and energy in coming out there and preparing for the game, so I didn't feel like stopping the game then and there, and I was a bit too shy to rock the boat with a long conversation about how they are doing it wrong when the problem might have all been in my head.

In a broader sense, it feels like you don't necessarily have problems picking up on hints or patterns of behavior that are off (which is what the normal admonition to 'communicate!' is about). The issue seems more like, even once you notice something going wrong, you don't adjust your actions or expectations on the fly to try to resolve it. E.g. as other posters mentioned, you saw that the game was going significantly worse than the previous session, but you felt like you had to just push through - run everything as you had previously planned. Whereas in retrospect in this situation, it seems that if you had just drove 200 miles and done nothing, then went home, you'd actually be better off than having had run game.

So in such a situation where things are trending in a bad direction you should think, based on your conclusions and your analysis, 'what can I change about this interaction, even if it feels awkward or uncomfortable when I imagine it?'.

Regardless of your friend being a jerk, this kind of behavior among gamers is actually pretty normal. Most people are not self-aware or mature enough to not only pinpoint the source of their dis-satisfaction but also to take measures to really address it. Many gamers who aren't having fun won't take the step to think 'what can I do OOC to improve things?' - they'll be entirely focused IC when it comes to 'productive' actions, and the frustration will just generally start spilling over into misbehavior OOC. "I'm finding the game unpleasant, so rather than make contact with that unpleasant situation that I can't do anything about, I'll just joke with my friends and ignore the game."

So the DM has to be the one who is willing to do the awkward or unpleasant thing to really address the situation and get around the avoidance behavior.

Furthermore, I know player's don't like to surrender, but it isn't completely unreasonable to think it a possibility. I seen plenty of successful "jail break" scenarios from both sides of the screen, and ransom is a fairly common penalty to defeat without death even if it isn't "fun" too lose*. And if they did surrender they wouldn't face prison or execution, but rather a trial by combat, which I would have thought would have made for a fun adventure in the future.

Its a basic DM truism that whatever you have in your head doesn't change what the players perceive. You can see that 'surrender is a possible choice, or the fight can be won, or ...', but they can't read your mind. You have learn to recognize the 'victory or death' sentiment brewing and be willing to change course, or stick to gaming that doesn't get so close to particular problem scenarios like surrender.

But I am curious how you would handle that situation; if the players did something really stupid right before the "final boss" of an adventure and then went ahead to fight the boss, what would you do? Just have the enemy go *poof* or drop dead of a heart attack rather than fight? If offering surrender and fighting are both now out of the question, I can't really see what's left. The players weren't even willing to negotiate with them.

Stop the game and discuss what's going on. 'Hey guys, do you realize that you have one round left before your death becomes inevitable, and all you need to prevent it is to ignore the tank and push the lever that stops the doomsday device.', 'Hey guys, you do realize that these guys are the last boss. They're talking themselves up as invincible, but even with your resources depleted this is a fight you can win.', etc.

[aspekt]

This whole perspective that the GM is the only adult in the room capable of expressing their preferences is a bit odd.

If the players were bored, then as puportedly well-adjusted adults with real life responsibilities, they are perfectly capable of expressing that.

If they can't, then I would call into question the claims to being responsible adults.

I find this burden of GMs being the only adult in the room even stranger coming from forum regulars who decry lack of agency being given to players in certain game systems and play styles. Frankly, it strikes me as hypocritical to cry foul over player agency in a game and then to refuse players that agency in real life when it likely counts the most.

[Kalmageddon]

My opinion is that either Talakeal is for whatever reason omitting some pretty heavy background stuff with all these people, things that might explain why he's being treated this way, for example, or that these people are some of the worst friends and rudest people I've ever heard of, to the point I struggle to make sense of their actions. It sounds like one moment they are friendly and plesant enough to make you want to game with them, the next they go full troll-mode and try to insult you the worst way the can.
This just doesn't add up.

[1337 b4k4]

This whole perspective that the GM is the only adult in the room capable of expressing their preferences is a bit odd.

If the players were bored, then as puportedly well-adjusted adults with real life responsibilities, they are perfectly capable of expressing that.

If they can't, then I would call into question the claims to being responsible adults.

I find this burden of GMs being the only adult in the room even stranger coming from forum regulars who decry lack of agency being given to players in certain game systems and play styles. Frankly, it strikes me as hypocritical to cry foul over player agency in a game and then to refuse players that agency in real life when it likely counts the most.

I don't think anyone has suggested the players don't have their own faults in this, but Talakeal specifically asked about how other GMs would have handled it, and things that he could have done differently. It does us no good to say that the players should have done X Y or Z because that's in the past, and Talakeal can't control anyone else but himself.

[Talakeal]

My opinion is that either Talakeal is for whatever reason omitting some pretty heavy background stuff with all these people, things that might explain why he's being treated this way, for example, or that these people are some of the worst friends and rudest people I've ever heard of, to the point I struggle to make sense of their actions. It sounds like one moment they are friendly and plesant enough to make you want to game with them, the next they go full troll-mode and try to insult you the worst way the can.
This just doesn't add up.

Aside from my one friend I hardly know these people. I have only met them 4 times before, and the previous time I saw them everyone seemed to be happy and friendly and having fun.

Now, my friend, who is the one I really take issue with because of his tirade after the game, may have some long term baggage that he is holding up from something that may or may not have happened years ago, but I haven't had much contact with him recently and can't recall any of it being negative.

[Sith_Happens]

But you know what, looking back over the threads I have started in the last year, about half of them were started because this friend has started DMing and now thinks he is god's gift to gaming and handing out judgments from on high. I think I just need to stop taking what he says so seriously, or better yet just stop listening to him altogether.

So there IS a connection!

[Solaris]

Ok, first off, even if I was the absolute worst DM in the world, what my "friend" said to me after the game was completely uncalled for. He went into the realm of personal attacks and one of the meanest things anyone has ever said to me and I really can't see how I bear the responsibility for that no matter how bad my game was.

I'd agree completely with this statement, except the absolute worst DM in the world encompasses people like Byron Hall and Chief Circle.

But you know what, looking back over the threads I have started in the last year, about half of them were started because this friend has started DMing and now thinks he is god's gift to gaming and handing out judgments from on high. I think I just need to stop taking what he says so seriously, or better yet just stop listening to him altogether.

This one, on the other hand, I agree to without reservation.
Look, I'm not going to sharpshoot your performance as a DM by trying to read in between the lines. I wasn't there, I have only your account, and frankly you didn't ask for us to call out all your mistakes. There's not enough to go by, and it's unwanted to begin with (for the record, though, I don't see too much trouble with how you ran things). One person's misery is another person's delight, when it comes to gaming.
What I can say is this: This decision is long overdue, and if you're right about him being the genesis of a lot of your problems I'm glad you made it.
It provides important data on the Takworld theory.

Ok, just reread Lanky's story. Yeah, he was definitely in the wrong there. Now, I don't ever think it is ok to stab someone, but I would probably do the exact same thing in that situation, his behavior was totally unacceptable.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on that part; I don't want to totally derail your thread and I recall how the actual thread turned into a hate-fest on Lanky.

And maybe I am old fashioned, but I consider a superficial stab wound in the heat of the moment to be less offensive than beating a woman who is half your size into unconsciousness while she is trying to apologize.

This part, on the other hand, but only because it's touching on certain things I find particularly troublesome.

That is old-fashioned in the sexist sort of way, if you're giving the female assailant the benefit of 'the heat of the moment' while not giving it to the guy who leaped to TLB's defense. There isn't a whole lot of time to sit, analyze, and think, and the guy did just see her stab someone. For all he knew, it was a lot more serious than a superficial stab.

Chivalrous courtesy and gentlemanly conduct do not protect ladies who stab people because of emotional issues; if you stab someone because you're upset, you ain't a lady. You're a psychopath who needs to realize that your emotions do not have a greater value than other people's health and wellbeing. Get mad at and yell at them? Sure. Stab them? No.

The fact that she's half his size? She should have thought about that before attacking his friend. The guy who delivered the roundhouse kick didn't beat her into unconsciousness, he only struck her the one time. Her being smaller than him is why the ideas of chivalry, gentlemanly conduct, and ladylike conduct developed, to reinforce that males shouldn't attack females and engendering in women that they shouldn't be picking fights (particularly with men) on account of the differences between the sexes. Being small and weak isn't a moral defense against retaliation when you're the aggressor.

In short? "Don't hit girls" only applies when the girl didn't hit you (or your buddy) first. It kinda works like the D&D sanctuary spell.

[Lord Raziere]

So there IS a connection!

see Talakeal? take your "friend"'s advice with a grain of salt, at best. but really, cut off contact. no gaming > bad gaming. this is not my opinion, this is wisdom passed down to me from the elders of the roleplaying community who have experienced their own horror stories. you can try to find good gaming yes, but never settle for bad gaming, it only causes pain.

[Excession]

As for the encounter itself, the bounty hunters were always meant to be the "end boss" of the game, the players new they were coming from the start, and they showed up during the previous fight with the sheriff, not after. Maybe I could have come up with an alternative if given a lot of time to think about alternate resolutions in hindsight, but at the moment I didn't see any, especially when I was told I needed to wrap the game up quickly so they could get back to D&D.

Sorry for perhaps nit-picking over details...

Were you playing out all of the bounty hunters' actions in combat? Watching NPCs fight other NPCs, in detail, is something that players can find really boring. In DMing, as in life, nobody wants to watch you play with yourself.

With hindsight engaged, my idea for an alternative resolution would be for the bounty hunters to realise that they're in the middle of a small scale zombie apocalypse, and fighting with other non-zombies is just going to expend resources they need to fight the real threat. Have them open with "How about we all kill these zombies, then we'll pretend we never saw each other?". I would give the players a chance to come up with this or another plan first though.

[Talakeal]

Sorry for perhaps nit-picking over details...

Were you playing out all of the bounty hunters' actions in combat? Watching NPCs fight other NPCs, in detail, is something that players can find really boring. In DMing, as in life, nobody wants to watch you play with yourself.

With hindsight engaged, my idea for an alternative resolution would be for the bounty hunters to realise that they're in the middle of a small scale zombie apocalypse, and fighting with other non-zombies is just going to expend resources they need to fight the real threat. Have them open with "How about we all kill these zombies, then we'll pretend we never saw each other?". I would give the players a chance to come up with this or another plan first though.

Actually, that is more or less what happened. The players killed the sheriff then ran and hid and didn't come out until all of the zombies (and most of the town) were dead. Then they started talking to the bounty hunters, stopped talking half way through, and then proceeded to do random stuff.

I didn't roll any dice for NPC on NPC combat, no.

[Gritmonger]

Aside from my one friend I hardly know these people. I have only met them 4 times before, and the previous time I saw them everyone seemed to be happy and friendly and having fun.

Now, my friend, who is the one I really take issue with because of his tirade after the game, may have some long term baggage that he is holding up from something that may or may not have happened years ago, but I haven't had much contact with him recently and can't recall any of it being negative.

Ever think that after game one, they might have had enough fun that he felt threatened, lambasted your gaming style as an "experienced GM" and then primed the pump for a bad time just to, by process of elimination, show how good he was?

[SiuiS]

What a load of BS. "Normal poeple" my ass.

The only gamers i have ever met who partook in some sort of suicidal, game disrupting behaviour ever were the weirdos. I can really see some potential in the actions of the guy that sacrificed himself with the TNT, as in "I am not going back to jail. Ill take em down.". Really think thats cool.

But the rest? Outright weird.

By his definition psychopathical behaviour is the new normal. No well adjusted, caring individual would commit seppuku or blow up a town wall after fighting that hard to save the town. It just makes NO SENSE AT ALL.

Dont know what went wrong there, but thanks for sharing. Was a good read. Just sorry ti hear it went wrong.

[sarcasm]
But it's all just toons right? Lol aaaaaaaaay!
[/sarcasm]

This is obviously a beer and pretzels "roll to see if I do her!" Kind of group. That's fine. And to those groups, people who view gaming as a time commitment and want everyone to being their game face are weird; it's only a game right? Y so srs, just relax and jeez stop being uptight it's not like you had to come here, jeez.

I disagree, entirely. I am an adult. My time is worth more than that. My time is worth more than minimum wage, which means my time is worth more than any other entertainment for the same value. If I drove two hundred miles (eight gallons of petrol!) and burnt six hours watching kindergarteners play make-believe really, really badly, and then insult me for doing so? You can bet your ass there are some issues there.