Gaming angst

[melchar]

Okay, this is in the realm of midnight complaints. When I referee a game for others, my intent is that I really want to present a story in the game-world that is fun, inspires some emotional responses, makes the players think and exposes them to a sense of danger and adventure. [remember that Bilbo Baggins called adventures nasty untidy things that makes one late for breakfast.]

All in all I think I do a good job of preparing the game, keeping things going without turning it into an IRS audit session because of the rules - while not ignoring the structure that rules do provide.

Unfortunately for a while now I have had the sense that I have some players who would rather be somewhere else. Like playing on the PS2 or GBA or playing cards or reading or sleeping, rather than paying attention to what is happening at the table.

Some of this is my fault, just because:
[a] = during a combat, even the quickest combat turn passes slowly when there are more than 4 players in a game and each has their turn, describing their action/rolling dice;
[b] = that my corrected vision causes me to now have to = look at set-up with glasses to see table/take glasses off to refer to facts on sheet/make rolls/take notes = for each of the baddies they are fighting, which also takes forever when there is more than one monster on the table being fought -- so combat turns just take a lot of time
[c] = so combat turns take time and interaction takes time because it's not just one-on-one talking to a single character and when it's shopping everyone wants to have full concentration for their shopping all at the same time.

But just WHEN did everyone decide that if I was NOT looking at them then they were going to go away from the table?!? Even if it isn't all about THEM at the time, why aren't they interested in what else is happening?

And then there are players who are AT the table who seem like they would rather ruin the game for EVERYBODY else just so they can cause trouble by questioning rules, bringing up rules, wanting to amend the rules and quoting rules from memory [at rare times, actually quoting the rules correctly] - just to make a point.

And I find myself wondering = why am I putting up with this?

Currently my Saturday game has 9 players in it. The Sunday game has 7 players. Some of the problem players are in both games and piss me off for different reasons. Inattention pizzes me off almost as much as the rule-bitching because it implies indifference to the game.

I'm getting really annoyed in both games. I've been doing really choice games with involved plots and getting complaints about how tough the stories are for both games [while the characters still are 'winning' in that they are, for the most part, surviving to accomplish specific missions]. And the Saturday host is driving me out of the house by blaring at high HIGH volume his TIVO'd shows during the dinner break. More of the Saturday players really don't put any effort into putting any kind of personality into their character - and there are some who make really ANNOYING comments that make problems for others and then claim it wasn't being said by their characters. Sadly, the worst rule's-bitcher is in both games and making MORE people than just me want to strangle him. Meanwhile a couple of the better players are also pissing me off by doing the card playing thing way too often. But then there are the players who ARE trying to put life into their characters and who DO pay attention. And some of them are driving a considerable distance just to be in my games.

I am like SO conflicted. What do I do? It's not like there's a convenient DELETE button to get rid of the problem parts of my problem players. When good, they do contribute to a better game and I personally like ALL of the players, when away from the table. It's just mounting problems that is making my sanity points dribble out of my ears!

Comments

[melchar.livejournal.com]

I've appreciated the comments, but the really amusing parts are that - except for my nearest and dearest - the main causes of my irritation aren't on LJ, so they won't be reading this.

The annoyance factor is the worst with one specific player - and I may ask him to only be in one of the 2 games. That may help. Another aid may be to stop running at Paul's place on Saturday & reduce the number of Saturday players.

Comparing the two games, the Sunday game is much less stressful than the Saturday game - BUT it follows the Saturday game, so there is some slop-over-stress. And when there is an annoying, why-can't-they-drop-the-subject rules nagging, it always seems inspired by one player who gets the brunt of my irritation. Other people only get tarred with a very small amount of that annoyance.

The really distressing thing from my POV is that, whereas boojum makes me want to beat him senseless from his rules-bitching, he tends to play a good character in either game. The Sunday PCs have great personalities - and IMHO - even the weakest at the table is about 200% better than a couple of the Saturday guys. And Trey, when he can stay at the table, does a great job. Also MHO who the (expletive) cares if people thinks his PCs personalities drive the games? If (all caps now) SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE A PERSONALITY THEY DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THOSE WHO DO!.

It pisses me off that Trey's gotten so gun-shy over criticism about his playing style. The ONLY other Saturday PC who has the ability to successfully manage a group of PCs is Silarus and she's found that it is a thankless task.

Then, of course, there's the Sunday game - and the players there have found that if a Trey PC isn't in charge .... they end up with _Bart_. (Actually, I have great fun with Tom - and with both he & Victor refereeing there are times I can share a few silent moments of fellow feeling with them.) For Sunday, I don't mind there being a lessened feeling of direction to the game. It works with what they are trying to do.

But a forceful Trey PC doesn't bug me. Flavorless PCs that run away from anything resembling flavor text and can't manage to do in-character dialogue for more than 2 sentences BUG me. Rule-nagging _really_ bugs me. Most of that is happening on Saturday, too. Just makes me feel all growly.

Gaming "Rules and Etiquette"

[theruff.livejournal.com]

Hi Melchar, my 2cp comments are below:

Game slowing due to Combat:

The game slowing due to combat is natural; however, if you have noticed in recent weeks/months, combat with the "natural" creatures (eg: giant crabs) has gone much more quickly. Combat with demons, where they get *many* attacks, hit most everything, and wade through lower level characters like "hot-knifes-tru-butta" make things slow down considerably. IMHO, it's because people take a much more active role in the eventual outcome of demon, gargoyle, and sirrush combats because the alternative is an entire afternoon of rolling backups. Also, our group is much more buff than before, and demons are more rare (even with the current group) than giant crabs or giant scorpions.

Table etiquette and wandering off:

You, as the GM, put considerable time into every situation you place in our path, and the players need to respect that more. AS a GM, I know it's frustrating when I have to keep calling people back to the table - especially in the middle of a combat or a big role-playing/interaction session. However, if someone has taken enough damage to drop them, are paralyzed, or are otherwise *not* in the game (ex: staying at the inn while others are shopping) -- then by all means (IMHO) wander off for a bit. We'll call you when you can play again. I don’t think you are requesting that people stay glued to their chairs – just stick around if you are alive, kicking, and are able to participate in the current course of events. Even if you CHOOSE to say nothing and be a ‘bump on the log’ – you will at least not need to be updated/informed of a situation you should have listened to in the first place.

AS a player, I often like to see what happens to other characters -- but have been known to wander off to play cards while my character is unavailable for comment, or EVEN at times when my interaction is needed. I will try to be more selective in my 'wanderings'... :0)

Rules discussions:

I am an advocate of a player’s right to have the GAME MASTER answer their questions. There have been too many times when I ask if I can do something, and players jump down my throat with every reason why I shouldn't even be asking. In my opinion, if a situation warrants other player commentary, fine. For example, the question: 'What squares are covered by a medium shield,' affects many people because many players HAVE shields and are directly affected by such a ruling. However, questions on Bart's Gloves that shoot line w/ grapnel, Gabrielle's Boots of Power, Dandon's hatchet of magical disruption, Tarot's scimitar 'Heart of the Sun,' Hyperion's crown, and Terrence's mind-zap power should be left to the GM and the player. The exception to this is if a player other than the owner of said item/power remembers that item/power acting in a way different than how they are acting NOW, then fine -- say something. If you are being attacked by Tarot’s sword, fine – say something. But arguments on how they SHOULD be acting when it doesn’t affect you or your stuff are up to the GM and the player.

Rules discussions are just part of the game ... but every discussion should not be the lead-in to an argument.

Complicated Plots:

True, complicated plots can be ... frustrating, but it's the good type of frustration (at least for me). I mean from my personal perspective, Bart wants to simply save Eldin and go home -- but this is looking more and more like it will never happen. I mean heck, he's wearing a deposed demon-lord as a necklace now. The nice thing about *complicated* plots is that they still have a smattering of normalcy in them by the simple fact that the world is always there, and abandoned keeps, ratel lairs, and sunken treasure chests will still show up along the way.

If people want simple dungeon crawls, then they should play online MUD’s – NOT play in a live game with an extremely talented GM (OK, so I had to kiss-up a little bit).

....

Tom

Re: Gaming "Rules and Etiquette"

[gil-liant.livejournal.com]

I think the 'wandering off' complaint is even when characters have no ability to interact or participate. At least that is how it seems to me. An audience is requested. ^_^ Unconsciousness is a special case, IMHO. (Especially in slowed-down games during combat.) However, the _actual_ desires of GMs are not clear here. (Nor even necessarily consistent. I suspect there's a definite "mood component" here, depending on how the game is going. Sometimes I know I've wandered away and not been missed -- other times people have felt the absence noticeably, and I regret those times.)

As far as other players answering questions meant for the GM -- time with the GM is at a premium. In slowed-down games even more so. Strange as it may seem, some players think they are _helping_ if they try to answer questions directed at the GM, since that way the GM doesn't have to spend precious time answering the question, doing the research, looking up the answer, and being reminded of past related rulings. (All too often in _exactly_ that order, sad to say.)

Unfortunately, a desire for control appears to be a necessary component of the mindset of all successful GMs, so players' efforts to offload work from the overloaded GM usually backfire by dragging even _more_ GM attention away from the game, not less.

'Complicated plots'? Who brought that up. I don't know to what you are referring here. Don't remember anyone complaining about 'complicated plots'. ^_^

Re: Gaming "Rules and Etiquette"

[melchar.livejournal.com]

Actually, for me it's easy. If the PC is KO'd or not physically present for a section of the game, then wandering off is OK. _However_ if the PC is engaged in a combat, present when people are talking or shopping or is in *any* situation where I will either:
(a) have to call said player BACK to the table [possibly more than one time] to get input/die rolls/a reaction or comment; or
(b) will have to RECAP what has just transpired to said player because they weren't at the table - but they whine their PC should know what went on since said PC was there -
then I bloody well want that player at the table!

And -both- of those instances have happened with annoying frequency of late. BOTH of them happened with _Gil_ at last Saturday's game, for instance.

IMHO the annoyance factor is increased when all the other problems are also happening. That is - while it is a minor niggle if someone takes a nap - it becomes more of a factor when other players are wandering AND a rule is being argued about AND someone is reading a book at the end of the table. The frustration seems to mount in a logarithmic fashion...