Shadowrun
Off-topic => Off-off-topic => Topic started by: Elektrycerze3 on <04-03-13/0746:56>
-
Hoi!
One of my players is constatly arguing over matters which the rest of the group (including yours truly as the gm) consider self-evident or indemonstrable.
For example, she is positively confident, that your average Joe is very attentive to his surroundings, like, he will immediately spot a new ad on an announcement board near an entrance to his appartment building (like this:http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg (http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg)), or that he will immediately spot, that there is a new pen in his cubicle at work. Mind you: spot immediately and 10 times out of 10.
We tried proving otherwise with ADD statistics, with some random psychology and attention tests... All to no avail.
The sad thing is, it makes gaming with her somewhat... challenging. Like, "why didn't he spot the RFID tag on his desk? What, his perception is at -2 as he is distracted and he didn't roll good enough? Bullshit, it is obvious!".
And it's impossible to dissuade her. She never concedes, even if her last argument is "I don't buy it". One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Of course we might well be wrong on some points, but she never tries to prove her point, she just considers herself right a priori.
Could you offer any advice on the situation? She is our friend but it is becoming a problem.
Thanks in advance!
-
Oof. That's rough. First off, I would take some offense at the "myth" of PTSD. Although not diagnosed, I am quite confident my brother had PTSD after his tour in Iraq.
I will say I agree with her in that people notice changes in very familiar environments most of the time, but not all. Perception score is mostly irrelevant here. Take your bedroom. If you had something in a particular place, and you come home, there's a decent chance you'll notice if it's moved unexpectedly. Ultimately, this is a matter of giving ground where she should. Unless it's important for some reason, I'd be inclined to just go with the GM. Tell her, away from others, that it's distracting from the game and hurting some people's fun when it becomes a big deal. I would also put in instances where people do notice such changes, no roll required. She's not exactly right, but not completely wrong either. Big objects that are obvious, go her way on it sometimes.
-
Kick her from the table. Poof. Problem solved. Sometimes people need to learn that to play in a group based game you gotta fit in with your particular table. If you're playing against them by wanting to ignore perception as a skill (which is what she is basically saying from your post) then I'd say its time to have a "Come to Jesus" talk.
"Hey look, I understand you have your beliefs and you're allowed to have them. But the rules say this, we as a group are gonna follow those rules and if you aren't going to follow those rules then we need you not to play with us. It was a group vote."
Or you break out the cards and take a vote that way..... >.>
-
We had a player like this once. It got to the point where anytime he started going into whatever spiel was about to begin, the DM just ignored him and talked to the rest of the group. Don't let it get to that point, it's not good for anyone. I second the suggestion to talk to her in private and discuss with her about how it's hindering the game for the group as a whole. Ask her to help you make a great story, instead of digging in her heels and fighting against you and bringing the game to a screeching halt. A rational player will be humbled and agree. An irrational player won't, and then it's time to part ways with her. You can still be friends outside of the game, but you're not required to have her there.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_blindness#Change_blindness_blindness
I feel so lucky when I hear some of the problem player stories here... Anyway, if I were GMing for a player in a situation like this, I'd have a hard time not just telling them: "There are mechanics for these things, tiny objects have certain thresholds, a PCs perceptive ability has a rating, and there are modifiers to both of these things. We're going to use them." If she doesn't like that, why is she playing a dice-based RPG?
-
Thanks for that link, it was interesting reading. :)
-
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MST3KMantra (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MST3KMantra)
'Nuf said.
-
I think you should swap the numbers on two of her less used skills on her character sheet, then during the game point it out and say "point proven".
-
Hoi!
One of my players is constatly arguing over matters which the rest of the group (including yours truly as the gm) consider self-evident or indemonstrable.
For example, she is positively confident, that your average Joe is very attentive to his surroundings, like, he will immediately spot a new ad on an announcement board near an entrance to his appartment building (like this:http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg (http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg)), or that he will immediately spot, that there is a new pen in his cubicle at work. Mind you: spot immediately and 10 times out of 10.
We tried proving otherwise with ADD statistics, with some random psychology and attention tests... All to no avail.
The sad thing is, it makes gaming with her somewhat... challenging. Like, "why didn't he spot the RFID tag on his desk? What, his perception is at -2 as he is distracted and he didn't roll good enough? Bullshit, it is obvious!".
And it's impossible to dissuade her. She never concedes, even if her last argument is "I don't buy it". One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Of course we might well be wrong on some points, but she never tries to prove her point, she just considers herself right a priori.
Could you offer any advice on the situation? She is our friend but it is becoming a problem.
Thanks in advance!
The "problem" seems more that you and your group are the ones being intransigent. 'Realism' should NEVER be taken to an extreme that dampens the fun of the game, and with your statement of "trying to prove otherwise with statistics" that is exactly what you're doing. Simply put, LIGHTEN UP.
-
Hoi!
One of my players is constatly arguing over matters which the rest of the group (including yours truly as the gm) consider self-evident or indemonstrable.
For example, she is positively confident, that your average Joe is very attentive to his surroundings, like, he will immediately spot a new ad on an announcement board near an entrance to his appartment building (like this:http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg (http://img0.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/6/91/966/91966972_obyavleniya.jpg)), or that he will immediately spot, that there is a new pen in his cubicle at work. Mind you: spot immediately and 10 times out of 10.
We tried proving otherwise with ADD statistics, with some random psychology and attention tests... All to no avail.
The sad thing is, it makes gaming with her somewhat... challenging. Like, "why didn't he spot the RFID tag on his desk? What, his perception is at -2 as he is distracted and he didn't roll good enough? Bullshit, it is obvious!".
And it's impossible to dissuade her. She never concedes, even if her last argument is "I don't buy it". One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Of course we might well be wrong on some points, but she never tries to prove her point, she just considers herself right a priori.
Could you offer any advice on the situation? She is our friend but it is becoming a problem.
Thanks in advance!
The "problem" seems more that you and your group are the ones being intransigent. 'Realism' should NEVER be taken to an extreme that dampens the fun of the game, and with your statement of "trying to prove otherwise with statistics" that is exactly what you're doing. Simply put, LIGHTEN UP.
My bad, I didn't explain the situation in full:
We never initiate any arguments. She starts them. I always go for dramatic elements rather than realism in gaming. And we use statistics after games just as a way to maybe stop her disruptive behavior. It is she who considers things unrealistic.
It is exactly like this: the groups attempts to ambush some enemies, they fail their perception, she goes "no, they should have spotted us, it is so obvious!" Or imagine this: an NPC's public profile mentions PTSD, she goes "there is no such thing". We always try to refrain from disputes during games, but even "arguments" like "it's a game, deal with it" fail to work. I always try to end arguments immediately or at least argue in between games, but it is becoming increasingly difficult.
-
Take a deck of cards. If players want them to stay, have them out a red card face down. Too many black marks at the table and she goes. Don't risk the group for the individual.
-
Take the person aside before the next game. Ask them if they have anything going on that is spilling over to game time. If they do, suggest they take a break until things get sorted out.
-
Thanks for the input! Tonight we will discuss this with the group and we are definetly talking this through. I'll share the results afterwards.
I think you should swap the numbers on two of her less used skills on her character sheet, then during the game point it out and say "point proven".
You are devious! :) Great idea, although I can't use it: it'll only upset her without changing her opinion. It's not about being right or wrong but about finding a way to game peacefully.
-
Tell her to GTFO. From time to time, I argue as a player, and as GM I accept arguments on rules, where there are different interpretations. Very rare. And very quick. But if she dont want to play by the rules, she has no place at the table.
-
Still seems that "Lighten up" is what you and your group need to do. Just sounds like you're all getting all worked up over nothing.
-
Also true. The fact perception skill exist doesnt mean you have to roll for every shit :)
-
Still seems that "Lighten up" is what you and your group need to do. Just sounds like you're all getting butt-hurt over nothing.
Sounds like she's the one that needs to lighten up and is acting like a petty, butt-hurt child actually.
"What? I have to play by rules?! *sulk, whine, moan*"
Whining is not conducive to playing nor fun. GM asked you to make a role, make your role and get over it. You have an issue with it - since it's not actually in dispute of a rule - wait until after the game, don't disrupt the table. Don't pretend like GMs out to get you because you can't get it done.
Also worth noting, sounds like you're in the minority here, A4BG, in thinking that it's "everyone else has the problem". Know what that means? It's the trouble-maker that *gasp* is making the trouble.
-
Honestly, the ones telling the OP to burn the friendship and "boot" the person are the troublemakers, IMO. Someone has to look at things from her side.
-
Nowhere did someone say Burn a friendship. We're just talking about getting her away from the gaming table. Don't overdramatize it A4BG
-
OP, what you should do is take a phonebook, and beat the problem player about the head and shoulders with it until she stops being an idiot. Or until she shuts up. Either one works for this purpose. Now, I prefer a metro area phonebook, since it has a good amount of heft to it, but is a paperback, so won't leave any incriminating marks or injuries. If this doesn't work, kick her from the table until she learns her lesson.
-
Someone has to look at things from her side.
Actually, when you're the only one with a problem, that let's everyone else know something about your side right away - and that is: you're the only one with a problem.
It's not the GMs, nor indeed the entire table's, responsibility to cater to 1 player. Not ever. You can and should work with them, absolutely. But it sounds like she is not working with them. Just being obstinate and indeed offensive;
"... Bullshit, it is obvious!".
... She never concedes, even if her last argument is "I don't buy it".
... she just considers herself right a priori.
Honestly, the ones telling the OP to burn the friendship and "boot" the person are the troublemakers, IMO.
I don't disagree with this, but if she's pulling this kind of crap, it doesn't sound like she's that good of a friend. Of course you talk to her first if things aren't out of hand yet. But only the OP knows the reality of his relationship with her and what it's bounds are. If she makes it difficult for you to talk to her, what are you supposed to do?
Be a decent person or you go home - that's what it comes down to. You should never need to curse at people, especially the GM - he's putting in probably hours of work in his free-time, so you can all get together and have fun. I can't even comprehend what I would ever say to a friend in this situation, because a friend would never put a friend in this situation.
-
I have a problem player that i'm gonna have to deal tomorrow, the way i'm gonna correct the situation is i will be giving a general warning to all the players at my table so as not to pick on the player in front of the group. But i will issue a time out which means that player will forfeit their game session for that week, until the next week if the problem player doesn't correct their situation
-
I prefere oranges. Otherwise, i concur.
-
In general, if you're having a problem with a player, the first step is ALWAYS to have a direct conversation with them on the subject (generally this is best done in private). In the OP's case, it's generally best not to get into how wrong the player is (you are not going to be able to stop thinking these things in on conversation); rather, explain that it's disruptive and that she needs to stop bringing this stuff up during the game. If she really thinks something's that unrealistic, she can present her case for that outside of the game. You can and should at least listen to her, but if you're not going to go with her idea of how things are you should explain why.
Friends don't have to have the same world view, but you at least need to be able to expect one another's right to view things that way. That means treating her views with respect, but that also means she shouldn't try to override everyone else's world view with hers.
-
One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Wow, I hear some grade A crazy talk from some people I know, but that almost takes the cake. That said, I'd talk to her privately about her distracting from game time.
-
One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Wow, I hear some grade A crazy talk from some people I know...
Just because you disagree with it, doesn't make it crazy.
-
No, but some people do consider actively denying the evidence to be crazy. Most people who believe things like that also posit mass conspiracies to suppress what they believe the truth, which again tends to come off as crazy.
And in any case, the player is factually incorrect. PTSD is a real and observable phenomenon that has done a great deal of harm.
-
One time we gave her a couple of articles on posttraumatic stress disorder, but she still considered it a myth.
Wow, I hear some grade A crazy talk from some people I know...
Just because you disagree with it, doesn't make it crazy.
People who deny reality are crazy. Just like all the people who say the Holocaust was a myth and the moon landing was a hoax, or that Obama was born in Kenya. Blatantly ignoring reality makes you a grade A nutjob, full stop.
-
I've seen some offensive stuff. "PTSD is a myth" though?
Like it's been said, sit her down. Tell her that what she's saying is slowing the game down, and go on to say that she is being offensive. She doesn't have to agree, but she does have to have the decency to respect her friends. Currently, she is being disrespectful, disruptive, and that just doesn't work.
"I like you. I might even like gaming with you, if you'd stop kicking down the door every time we try to have fun. Why, just why, are you so convinced that this or that simply can't be? It's not like you've snuck into an R&D facility, heavily armed, and shot down a cybered corpsec grunt before cashing in your paydata. Why, do you think, you know better?"
If she doesn't give a straight answer, something that clicks, explains it all, and lets you clear the air or at least work towards an answer, then she's just not the right player for your game.
I'll tell you now, trying to prove things with real-life facts didn't help. You probably should have tried to get her to immerse herself in SR through suspension of disbelief, explaining that it's a fictional setting, where massive firebreathing lizards fire you for refusing to get a bunch of wires shoved into your nervous system.
Her attitude towards things could have been subverted this way, but at this point, it just plain isn't going to happen.
-
I'm debating whether I should start a debate on the possibility of perpetual motion and seeing if it will last indefinitely.
But beyond that, how you solve the problem really depends on what kind of result you want, and how they would react to what you do.
You obviously don't want to lose the friendship, so dropping them from the game (or beating them with a phonebook) would tend to bring more tension to the relationship, but if it holds for a while anyways it will typically resolve itself.
Privately talking to them in my personal experience does tend to yield good results, but not before I continually remind them in-game: "This is a game, we've got friggen dragons, magic and cyberlegs that can fire grenades! If you wanted realism, this is not the game for you, so either accept the rules as is, or please exclude yourself." so the private conversation is just to confirm that they understand everything and ask if there is some underlying factor to the hostility against the rules (possibly a hate for another player, or stress that others know the rules better so she feels that she has to have some sort of 'edge').
I've had plenty of players try and justify bringing pure cheese into a game and sending me some weebo youtube link of some guy dual wielding whips in his backyard, or firing shotgun slugs loaded with wax, but at the end of the day, YOU are the GM, and when you drop the hammer on a ruling that should be it, and it should be clear among your players that's how it's going to go to keep things simple, smooth, and fair. If they don't trust your judgement even after that, I'd consider finding new players.
-
You could ask the player if she thinks she could do better GMing, but that might backfire.
How experienced a gamer is she? Is it possible she played in a past game that encouraged her current behaviour?
-
And now, 'cause I'm all devil's advocatey today I feel the need to point out we lack the data to determine whether or not said player had a point in the perception matters, no matter how poorly delivered. In the case of the RFID tag, What color was the tag and the desk? Just where on said desk was it placed? In an open area with no other items near it or next to/behind something larger or more colorful, thus more like to draw the eye from the tag. In the case of the ambush... well I'm sure y'all get the drift. My point being perhaps she's trying to help with legitimate suspension of disbelief issues but has poor communication skills. :)
-
Id love to see OP's reflection on what we said so far.
-
And now, 'cause I'm all devil's advocatey today I feel the need to point out we lack the data to determine whether or not said player had a point in the perception matters, no matter how poorly delivered. In the case of the RFID tag, What color was the tag and the desk? Just where on said desk was it placed? In an open area with no other items near it or next to/behind something larger or more colorful, thus more like to draw the eye from the tag. In the case of the ambush... well I'm sure y'all get the drift. My point being perhaps she's trying to help with legitimate suspension of disbelief issues but has poor communication skills. :)
Pretty much. That's the problem with these "problem player" threads. We only ever get one side of the story, and no one in modern society wants to admit that maybe they have the problem. Instead everything is always the other person's fault. Without the other side of the story, we simply can not truly give real and useful advice on the situation.
-
...and no one in modern society wants to admit that maybe they have the problem.
Pfft. I'm an asshole at times, I know it, and I'll cop to it. More often in real life than online, though, which is somewhat of a reverse than what people would expect.
-
...and no one in modern society wants to admit that maybe they have the problem.
Pfft. I'm an asshole at times, I know it, and I'll cop to it. More often in real life than online, though, which is somewhat of a reverse than what people would expect.
When looking into the mirror, I also dontz lame the mirror for making me look like I do...
-
Is the first post biased? Probably, it's difficult to write something that isn't biased. Does that mean he's lying? No, of course not. Is the girl obviously wrong always? Nope. If the entire group says she is wrong, does that mean she's wrong? Probably, but not always. Does she make ridiculous claims like "PTSD doesn't exist."? Yes. Is she wrong? Yes. If she's saying something as offensively incorrect as this, is it likely that the other things described are accurate representations of her game-stopping stances? Yes, it's likely. Is this all conjecture? Yep.
-
More imprtantly, the implication that the group as a whole is trying to get her to stop this is evidence that she is in the wrong for the simple fact that it indicates that she is trying to impose her notion of how things should be upon everyone else, even though the rest of the group disagrees with her stances. That puts her in the wrong on a group dynamics level.
-
More imprtantly, the implication that the group as a whole is trying to get her to stop this is evidence that she is in the wrong for the simple fact that it indicates that she is trying to impose her notion of how things should be upon everyone else, even though the rest of the group disagrees with her stances. That puts her in the wrong on a group dynamics level.
Assuming that there isn't any provocation on their part, which there could very well be whether it's unnoticed or simply left out to make her look like the "bad guy". The point is we don't know because she isn't here to defend herself.
-
Provocation seems irrelevant to this particular case - it would not make the player in question any less in the wrong. Might mean everyone's in the wrong, but that really doesn't change the advice.
-
Provocation seems irrelevant to this particular case - it would not make the player in question any less in the wrong. Might mean everyone's in the wrong, but that really doesn't change the advice.
The "dump her" statements shouldn't have been made though, especially since she's not here to defend herself.
-
Provocation seems irrelevant to this particular case - it would not make the player in question any less in the wrong. Might mean everyone's in the wrong, but that really doesn't change the advice.
The "dump her" statements shouldn't have been made though, especially since she's not here to defend herself.
That's categorically bad advice regardless. That is the least likely course of action to deliver a properly positive outcome.
-
I totally forgot a more recent situation like this. When I first moved to China, I found a group of teachers that wanted to play D&D. There was one player that clearly saw himself as the alpha dog. He was loud, abrupt, and gave no thought to anyone else. Our DM didn't have the balls to have a man-to-man with the player, and the group died. The other players preferred to just stop playing instead of being there with him. You can't ignore something like this, and you definitely don't want to ruin a friendship. If you don't talk to her about it, the feelings you get during the game might start bleeding into your friendship. I still go out and get drinks with the guy. He's a good person and fun, there's just no reining in his impulses(which never matched the group's inclinations). I would have regretted dropping contact with him just because of a game.
-
If they're actually a friend, then a phonebooking or giving them a 'time out' from the group until they fix their behavior won't affect the friendship, reduces your stress, and increases group fun overall. If they're not actually a friend, but an acquaintance, then phonebooking or giving them a 'time out' from the group still reduces your stress and increases group fun overall. Either way, its a win. 'Friends' doesn't mean 'we always get along like fragging Care Bears'. 'Friends' sometimes means taking a phonebook upside their head and telling them to cut the crap.
-
Thanks for all the valuable input!
Here are the results:
We talked in a friendly manner, two times actually: on Thursday and on Sunday.
We (the rest of the group and I) didn't confront her and tried being gentle. She didn't recognize being disruptive, but we talked her into not voicing her objections until after any given game session. Not the best result, but at least it's a playable consensus.
That being said, we tried to find out if she was uncomfortable or something - after all, she wasn't like that all the way, only the last couple of months. And thanks to everyone, who suggested digging deeper! Although she didn't say it outright, our group is dead sure she isn't comfortable with the rules and her character and that just might be the reason she argues that much. The thing is, her English is much worse than she thinks and she fails to understand some rules. For whatever reason she doesn't acknowledge it and we don't want to hurt her feelings (one other group member doesn't speak English at all, but it is well known and we always help). I guess we'll have to help her without her knowing that. We agreed to spell out every dice pool we form, to reference rules often etc.
She was less disruptive this Sunday, but there are problems still. And to be fair, the phonebook advice proved to be as effective as the negotiation advice: I tried phonebooking her a couple of times and it worked just fine, everyone was happy in the end.
For all the devil's advocates: thanks too :) You've made me put on my self-reflecting cap. But All4BigGuns,
We only ever get one side of the story, and no one in modern society wants to admit that maybe they have the problem. Instead everything is always the other person's fault. Without the other side of the story, we simply can not truly give real and useful advice on the situation.
My aim was not to fix the blame or to prove something. I sought advice on preserving my gaming group and many omae here helped me with their advice, including you.
[spoiler]
What color was the tag and the desk? Just where on said desk was it placed? In an open area with no other items near it or next to/behind something larger or more colorful, thus more like to draw the eye from the tag. In the case of the ambush... well I'm sure y'all get the drift. My point being perhaps she's trying to help with legitimate suspension of disbelief issues but has poor communication skills. :)
Well, if you really want to know, the tag was black and it was placed in a plant pot with a cactus on the desk. Not the stealthiest way to go, sure, but she really made a scene of it.[/spoiler]
-
Glad to hear it, E. Really, making the initial breakthrough is the toughest part. Once you've got that down, you can work with her on the rest.
And glad to hear someone took my advice about the phonebook. Part of the reason it works is (assuming you don't get angry and swing hard) is that it is so over the top that people understand it is a semi-serious thing, whereas hitting someone (even in jest) with your bare hand could easily be taken the wrong way.
-
Glad to hear it worked, but one thing I'll point out from your post: an agreement to raise these issues after the game rather than during the game is the best result. I may detest some of the ides she apparently espouses, but that changes not one whit the fact that she has a right to be heard - the problem is simply one of providing a space for her to be heard without being disruptive, and then isolating the complaints to that space. If you were to get her to stop brining this stuff up at all, it wouldn't be because you managed to get her to change her world view because she realised she was being disruptive - it would be because she still has the same complaints, but stays silent. And then those complaints will, at some point, be joined by more legitimate grievances, and down the line it would cause you serious trouble.
-
The beatings will continue until the problem goes away. ;D
-
To quote Leroy Jethro Gibbs:
"A slap to the face would be humiliating. Back of the head is a wake-up call."
-
Glad to hear it, E. Really, making the initial breakthrough is the toughest part. Once you've got that down, you can work with her on the rest.
And glad to hear someone took my advice about the phonebook. Part of the reason it works is (assuming you don't get angry and swing hard) is that it is so over the top that people understand it is a semi-serious thing, whereas hitting someone (even in jest) with your bare hand could easily be taken the wrong way.
Thanks) At first I considered the whole phonebook thing a joke, but turns out... from now on I'll never underestimate the power of it)
Glad to hear it worked, but one thing I'll point out from your post: an agreement to raise these issues after the game rather than during the game is the best result. I may detest some of the ides she apparently espouses, but that changes not one whit the fact that she has a right to be heard - the problem is simply one of providing a space for her to be heard without being disruptive, and then isolating the complaints to that space. If you were to get her to stop brining this stuff up at all, it wouldn't be because you managed to get her to change her world view because she realised she was being disruptive - it would be because she still has the same complaints, but stays silent. And then those complaints will, at some point, be joined by more legitimate grievances, and down the line it would cause you serious trouble.
Thanks, but the only way to know for sure if it is the best result this time is to wait and see. You never know what's going on in someone's head, although I really hope you're right :)