How do you punish players who don't take your campaign seriously?

>>52261743
First, get out of the mindset of "punishing" anyone. It's a game, calm down.

Second, make a game worth getting invested in. Nobody cares about your fanfiction tier ripoff of Game of Thrones. Dark settings where everything is shit are hard to get invested in. Lighten up a little.

Third, talk with your players. Ask them their reasons why they're not taking things seriously. Could be a misunderstanding or a failure to communicate. Maybe they're just genuine shitters. You won't know until you sit down and ask.

>>52261743
If the players aren't taking your campaign seriously, then either you're not providing them with a compelling experience or they were never inclined to get invested in make-believe in the first place.

Some groups only want to kill shit and get loot and won't care even about a good story.

Be prepared for them not to take it seriously and not take it too seriously unless they do.

>>52261827
>Some groups only want to kill shit and get loot and won't care even about a good story.
I just tell those people to fuck off and play a video game.

>>52261743
>trying to force players to take things seriously

Give up and play paranoia.

>>52261743
Put there sin in the book of grudges. One day they will pay.

The lolrandumbecksdee and murderhobo people get targeted while in towns and cities. If you're going to be a massive shitter then expect to face the consequences.

I only really have this problem with 1. new players or 2. new systems.

File: 1370483158826.jpg (136KB, 710x524px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 710x524px

>>52261900
>>52261883
That's assuming the DM isn't trying to make everyone treat the game super seriously when it clearly isn't. Getting the players invested in a serious way requires you to be really good at setting the tone and telling the story, so much so that it's often better to go for a mix of seriousness and levity.

>>52261743
Give them a flat tire.

Ok so basically I had a decent campaign going for once but they started making retarded meme characters and having orgasm screeches every time one of them rolled a 20. Also one of them kept going off solo then whining that I didn't kill him with "rocks fall" bullshit instead of telling him to stop themselves. So I basically had him killed by running into a monster he literally could not have defeated. Now I realized I enjoyed it and I am looking forward to killing 2 other characters in the group that are either overpowered or the players annoy me.

>>52261827
>>52262010

These two are correct.

There's only two scenarios here, OP. Either you have rigid expectations for how players should interact with your world, or your players are just the kinds of people who will never take anything seriously.

>>52262100

Kill yourself. :)

If you feel the need to 'punish' your players, you're a fucking awful GM.

Talk to them. You're all there to create an enjoyable experience as a group. So fucking talk to them like reasonable human beings.

Explain the expectations you have and what you get out of the game, have them do the same. Discuss and negotiate as a group to find a satisfactory compromise, or agree to go separate ways if the playstyles people prefer are incompatible.

There are many nuances and different contexts this may be applied, but with that basic principle in mind there is no basis for ever 'punishing', 'training' or otherwise manipulating your players as a GM. They are not your students or your prisoners. They're friends who you want to have a good time with. If you think of them in those terms you show a total lack of respect for them and just come off as an asshole.

>>52261743
by not recruiting them into my game to begin with.

>>52261743
No tendies for GBP for them

>>52261743
>"punish"

Who actually uses this word in reference to a fucking game of pretend?

>>52261743

>Playing serious games

OP, it's like you have autism

>>52261743
I wouldnt say its a pinishment, but when i GM i have a tendency to give back what they put in. If your character doesn't "invest" in the world, it wont invest in them. This is usually in the form of NPC allies, favor with certain factions, and how their superiors and underlings treat them. To a lesser extent, i also find myself giving more personal plot hooks to those invested mainly because I know they will bite based on how their character acts.

Not to say people who are antisocial wont get anything, but its not going to be as rich or feel as good because i cant gauge them well. Never seen it do much harm though, because at least in my experience those players do it more for the numbers than anything.

>>52264258

I find myself doing this naturally, although I sometimes feel bad about it.

But... At the same time, the more a player gives me the more I have to work with. I'll always try to engage with players, to give them all things in the setting that should appeal to them, that they can connect with and get involved with, but some players are always more active than others.

I worry it might seem that I'm playing favourites, that certain people just get more stuff, but every time I try to redress the balance, to offer more options and such to the less active players, they either ignore them or squander them to the point I give up, although the anxiety never goes away.

>>52264308
>
But... At the same time, the more a player gives me the more I have to work with. I'll always try to engage with players, to give them all things in the setting that should appeal to them, that they can connect with and get involved with, but some players are always more active than others.

Exactly. Its not entirely intentional (personal/small group hooks are the main thing thats my fault, but i stand by the idea that most those wouldn't just fall into someones lap, you gotta build a foundation and so those players reap what they sow), but still feel a bit bad for doing it.

Ive played with my group for a long while now in the 1 campaign ive done/doing, and i think its just a conflict of style. They came into it with more experience with tabletop and did the typical no backstory thing. My fix to that was say they were a foreigner seeing the ways of this nation to better their own and have yet to even try to roll with the "new culture", prefering to just murder hobo about.

>>52262479
>If you feel the need to 'punish' your players, you're a fucking awful GM.

No. If they want me to spend time creating a campaign for them to play in, they can at least take it seriously. Not try to fuck every female NPC for no reason, or play joke / meme characters, or other chaotic randumb shit.

>>52263855
> normalfags who only play RPGs for entertainment

I bet you think the most important thing about RPGs is "having fun."

>>52264568
>implying it isn't the most important thing

>>52264650

They're either a troll or irredeemably stupid anon. Either way, they're not worth replying to.

It can be argued that RPGs and other leisure activities don't need to be 'fun', but instead must be compelling in some way (Harrowing movies, videogames like This War of Mine), but in the vast majority of cases people are looking for fun, which is entirely valid and no better or worse than the other potential kinds.

>>52264704
I know, just playing around. Also, This War of Mine? Never heard of it, what's it like?

>>52264756

A very interesting game, you play the surviving civilians in a city in the middle of a civil war, desperately struggling to stay alive, to protect the people close to you and to gather the supplies needed to get through.

It is not a fun game. It is difficult, desperate and harsh, with incredibly punishing mechanics and an incredibly bleak setting where you can find yourself the villain just through trying to get by.

But as an experience, capturing the horror of that terrible situation? It's a fucking masterpiece.

File: _calling_bullshit.gif (183KB, 214x200px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 214x200px

>>52264650
As I thought. You are an idiot who should go back to playing Cards Against Humanity. RPGs are not for you and you are the reason i include "what is the most important part of RPGs?" on my questionnaires for ALL new players who want to be part of one of my spectacular campaigns.

Anyone who answers "fun" is immediately out of the running.

>>52265480

How do you know they're spectacular if you never actually run them for anyone?

Actually, that must be part of how you support your delusion. Makes sense. You can believe yourself to be the greatest GM in the world if you reject all potential players so it's never put to the test.

>>52261743
Get new players. Really that simple.

Shitstains like >>52261809
>>52262479
and
>>52263855

They can't be reasoned with. They believe they are entitled to do whatever they want. So toss out that shit and get new ones.

>>52264568
>>52265480
I would call you an autist that's been here too logn, but I think I might be the autistic one for being able to recognize anonymous posters by how and what they type.

Here's your (You), regardless.

>>52265480
And anyone who's out of the running for your campaigns dodged a bullet, so it's a win-win.

>>52261743
The players aren't there for your narrative. You are there for the players' enjoyment. If you want people to respect your narrative, go write a goddamn book.

Even if you don't write a book, get off your high horse and quit GMing forever.

File: ENDLESS.jpg (10KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 236x236px

>>52261743
Depends. The first question you need to have answered is why the disruptive individual is seemingly disconnected from the campaign. It could be something as simple as them having lost track of what was going on at some point and due to never getting caught-up on events losing interest.

Perhaps they made a character that doesn't gel with the current story? In this case you could talk to them outside the game and ask if they want to roll-up a new character.

The most likely situation is that what the player imagined the game would be and what the GM is running are so different that the player has found themselves without motivation to even attempt to engage with the plot.

It is also possible that you found a shitty person who is one of those "lolsorandum" types who will never fit into any serious game.

Regardless of from where this problem stems OP the GM shouldn't seek to punish players but instead they should talk to their players to see why it is the player is acting the way they are and seek to take constructive criticism of their campaign to heart so that they may forge a better game.

File: Bait_Insufficient.png (42KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 625x626px

>>52265480
Come now. Even though "fun" is a nebulous answer you need only prod them to elaborate a bit so that you may better create a world for them.

I myself think one of the most important things about RPGs is the capability for carrying out thought experiments but I do recognize the need for fun.

What do you think the most important thing about RPGs is?

>>52265480
You're either mistaking "fun" for referring only to simple meaningless distraction, you're so far up your own ass that you're blind now, or you're a troll.

>>52265583
autism

>>52261743
I don't "punish" players, but I also don't hold back from taking a very stupid call to its logical conclusion. Any negative consequences the players fail to avoid are not "punishment," they are the consequences of their own actions in keeping with the rules of the setting.

>Obviously the guards were going to show up, you idiots. Have fun being wanted criminals in this city until you pay the fine or bribe an official.

>You grabbed a pulsating red organ, whose "roots" ran through an animated corpse and detected as "seriously evil shit" according to the paladin, with your BARE FUCKING HANDS. Roll Constitution, retard.

>You tried to steal from your fellow PC. No, I didn't try to stop you, just like I'm not trying to stop him from kicking your nuts into your torso. If you don't want people to be angry with you, don't do shit that makes them angry.

It pisses me off that players seem to expect me to either be "The Enemy" or their maiden aunt. I'm not here to throw endless curveballs and mimics at you, but I'm also not here to hold your hand or wipe your ass. I'm here to entertain and challenge you as you improvise a story in a world I've built, and its about as trying as it sounds without you throwing shit at the walls and expecting me to scrape it off.

I have a handful of quantum ogres ready at all times

File: luke cage chuckle.gif (1003KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

1003KB, 480x360px

ITT: Butthurt, pretentious GMs who blame their players for their shitty games.

Have fun trying to convince people a hobby isn't about enjoying yourself you sad little neckbeard.

Call a crusade on them

>>52261743
>How do you punish players who don't take your campaign seriously?
Easy.
While wearing sterile gloves, make an incision with a sterile scalpel blade through the skin of the scrotum. The incision will need to be just large enough for the testicles to fit through.
Then apply pressure between the testicle and body in order to pop out the testicle. After the testicle is partway out of the scrotum, use your fingers to pull the testicle out the rest of the way.
Then apply emasculators, which is an instrument that crushes and severs the spermatic cord, across the whole structure or make an incision through the tough fibrous tunic that covers the testicle.
Leave the emasculator in place for at least two minutes to crush and seal the blood vessels. Next, cut the cords that are on the side of the emasculator that is furthest away from the body. After the cords have been cut, the device will be slowly released.

Why?
How do you do it?

File: 1486688599437.gif (561KB, 119x152px) Image search: [Google]

561KB, 119x152px

>>52269883

File: sigmund-freud-9302400-1-402.jpg (63KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1200x1200px

>>52269399
>You grabbed a pulsating red organ, whose "roots" ran through an animated corpse and detected as "seriously evil shit" according to the paladin, with your BARE FUCKING HANDS

>>52262441
>There's only two scenarios here
How close minded can someone be?

>>52272342
>How close minded can someone be?
There's only one scenario here.

>>52261743
>punish
>for not partaking in a social activity in the way you'd like them to
>not even talking to them, or trying to find other players, just outright punishing them
I know this is 100% a bait thread, but there is unfortunately people out there who really are autistic enough to "punish" players.

File: 1483027831006.gif (2MB, 250x216px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x216px

>>52265480

>>52264568
>>52265480
>people actually think he's serious
For fucks sake anons.

>>52273177
they do, and don't.

If your players aren't serious tell them to be serious
If your players can't or don't want to be then kick them out
But either way, TELL THEM FIRST
DON'T BE A PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE, SOCIALLY RETARDED MONGOLOID.

>>52269490
>Butthurt, pretentious GMs who blame their players for their shitty games.

No, there are players who will, no matter the quality of the campaign, shit around and do stupid things, because they lack the creative capacity to engage in a roleplaying game for anything but cheap exploitative fun.

>>52261743
The only time I ''punished'' my player is when they do stupidly retarded shit


I had a fuckign PALADIN encourage the wizard to summon a demon jsut so he could best him in combat. Dumbfuck

>>52265762
It's psyching me out. Is it really always the same dude, or am I just seeing the same bait getting bitten over and over again?

>>52261743
"I notice you guys joking around a lot and not taking events seriously. Were you intending to have a more serious campaign, or something fun to screw around in? I need to know before I continue to design content, so I can give you things I know you'll enjoy."

File: 1448470579548.png (1MB, 780x721px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 780x721px

>>52273511
But I am serious.

If your purpose in playing D&D is "to have fun" then you are outright proving that you have zero understanding of what makes roleplaying unique as a hobby. If you just want to roll dice and fuck around, maybe you should play monopoly. Or Cards Against Humanity, which is much more fitting to someone whose sole goal is "fun."

Because let's face it: RPGs aren't really THAT fun. They aren't fucking orgasms. If your sole goal in a recreational activity is to "have fun" you are better off going to a bar and getting drunk. Or shooting up heroin. Or playing some video games.

People play RPGs for the creative satisfaction and fulfillment that they provide, as well as the unique mental experience of controlling a story that forms organically rather than with a single guiding hand in its creation. There are no plot holes in an RPG because players are usually acting in their best interests (except perhaps in the more cancerous of "story games" but even some of those are pretty good).

But, thanks to shit like Cards Against Humanity and Critical Role, people no longer care about creating a good story. Half of them just want to fuck around. Their only creative influences are Skyrim and Dark Scrolls, or else some terrible anime, so they try to create characters based off of that. Then give them "gimmicks" that 90% of the time are horribly executed, and are grating rather than entertaining. A lot of times they just want to fuck up the game and do stupid shit. Then screech when they roll a natural 20 like the die controls their endorphins. The shriek that women make when they roll this number (thanks to conditioning from Critical Roll and similar shows) has caused me to refuse several female players from my games. Not that the autistic bawling laughter of male players is much better.

They hijack it for simple hedonistic enjoyment. If a player is out for "fun", then you have just found a player who is out to ruin your campaign.

>>52265843
>And anyone who's out of the running for your campaigns dodged a bullet, so it's a win-win.

You clearly have never played in one of my campaigns. Listen dude, I have YEARS of experience as a DM. I have run a dozen different RPG systems and am usually running 2 to 3 campaigns at once, and that's not including the ones that are on hiatus for various reasons. I have all manner of items and set ups in my personal gaming lair which I have invested over 1000 dollars into. I also cook and make snacks for players in my campaigns. Most of these people are my friends but I add people to my group from time to time and they are usually amazed by the talent I display, I juggle all manner of plotlines and run great combats that are fast but still engaging. I would estimate I've run over 30 campaigns at this point that lasted over 10 sessions. Some of them lasted for hundreds of sessions and they are stories that the players still share to this day. Now obviously I cannot claim all of the credit for these stories, but I fulfilled the role of Gamemaster to near-perfection. I have honed and mastered my craft: of description, of rules knowledge, of interweaving plotlines that can respond to the characters' actions, and blending the in-game story elements to be all but a well-written TV episode. I have had people offer me money to GM for them, unsolicited. If you think Matt Mercer is a good DM then you have never experienced good DMing, which is quite likely given that something like 70% of /tg/ has never actually played an RPG, merely watched one on Critical Roll or some other god-awful podcast of staged action, bearded fat-asses, and obnoxious roasties. That is not what real gaming is like. Nor is it listening to some sad sack drone on over the mic on roll20 while his wife's son bawls in the background. If that is worth 10 bucks, then my GMing is worth fifty easily.

>>52261809
Actually reasonable advice. Surprised other's don't agree

>>52276146
good ol 'tism. Also nice walltext, no surprise people hate playing with you

>>52276373
nice pasta

>>52276146
>>52276373

Wow. You must be utterly dead inside.

I have the same problem.

Last week I had a quest exploring a ghost ship seen floating off the coast. Two of my players swam over to it, but one player decided he couldn't be bothered to do the quest and just sat on the shore (as in he sat on his fucking phone)

Also the two who did the quest, without continual hinting of rewards they just kept trying to leave the ship, even though it was clearly a quest i'd set up. They were like "Oh the crew are missing, let's go"

>>52276146
>the creative satisfaction and fulfillment that they provide
We humans call this "fun"

>>52276146
>>52276373

Did two people post two different pastas?

>>52276146
>>52276373
As I and others mentioned, you have an unnecessarily narrow definition of "fun" as purely meaningless and hedonistic. Maybe "enjoyable" is a word you'd be more comfortable. But in any case, if the way you want to enjoy ttrpgs is different from the way your players want to enjoy it, that's not anybody being "wrong", it's just a mismatch. Your version of "fun" or "enjoyment" isn't better or worse, and nobody's playing the game "wrong", you just aren't suited to play games together. Either you all need to figure out a way you can all enjoy the game the ways you want to, or you need to find other players.

Christ, it's like an autism bukkake in here.

>>52276498
>good ol 'tism.

good old nonargument. Try again.

>>52276543
How did you deduce that, exactly? I want to see the exact reasoning.

File: 1481064702551.gif (2MB, 297x330px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 297x330px

ITT: OP is autismo, baiting or both

>>52276594
>>52276631
You wanna get semantic? Fun is "enjoyment, amusement, or lighthearted pleasure." I took that right off of google. That can either mean absolutely nothing (because it means different things to different people) or it can mean pure enjoyment. Endorphins rush. That sort of thing.

The simple fact of the matter is, fun either means something or nothing. If you think it's too narrow, fine: but you can never use "well as long as everyone is having fun" in an argument again.

Because you could stop playing an RPG, take off your clothes, and have a fucking orgy, and that would also be "fun" and probably more fun than the RPG. But if I did that at your game you would probably be pissed at me. Why? Because you wanted to play an RPG. And an orgy is not an RPG. And you know what? Neither is this stupid-ass Cards-Against-Humanity-esque bullshit of giggling screeching hipsters playing youtube videos or making references to Dark Scrolls and other video games, because they are so creatively bankrupt they can't even think of anything outside their stupid-ass video games. And you know what? I directly blame /tg/ for this, because the greentexts that encourage that sort of behavior are products of this board. Los Tiburnos and Sir Bearington and all the god-awful fucking nat20 stories that pour out of here like shit out of a prolapsed arsehole, have drawn in a crowd of retarded chucklefucks who expect that sort of thing to take place on a daily basis.

I recently had a player in one of my groups show me a few /tg/ greentexts on his phone. And he wasn't the only one. These stories have infiltrated the tabletop community, and outside of it, drawing in new players. And these aren't the good stories, these are the stupid meme-tier joke ones that deserved to die out like the stupid childish shit they are. RPGs are childish enough without everyone trying to pull off some epic stunt to post online for upvotes and validation.

>>52277129
Are you Italian?
Because this thread is a pasta factory.

>>52277207
>>52276604
> I lost the argument so I will claim it's all just copypasta that is strangely somehow tailored to exactly what I just said.

>>52277260

There's not really any argument here to lose. You have these bizarre opinions on how games work, they are contrary to my experiences and perspectives on how games work, and I will not accept your opinion as fact.

But I do know I've seen these points before expressed basically verbatim.

>>52277340
Yeah, but now, whenever this shit pops up again, we can get the thread closed earlier with this concentrated autism!
See, a silver lining.

>>52277260
Now, I believe "pasta factory" could also imply the creation of new pasta, not just the regurgitation of old one.
What is your stance on this issue?

>>52269312
He's right. If you have players being asses, simply abandon them and freeze them out.

>>52277018
>reasoning
>about feelings
See, your 'argument' ignores the fact that fun is a subjective and personal meaudurment that precludes quantification for a number of reasons.

You're dead inside because all you can think about is how other people having fun in ways you disapporive of is not just bad, but horrible and should be disallowed, and furthermore all people who have fun differently are horrible. Your way is the only right way, and you're time and thought and skillsa re worth more than all others.

You're so self centered it never even occurred to you that you might not only be wrong, but you are wrong for the very reasoning you are using to make your argument.

You're dead inside because you can't empathize with anyone or anything.

>>52277340
> reddit spacing

No wonder you think these opinions are bizarre. Your main motivation for playing games is to collect the most ridiculous nat20 or nat1 scenario possible to post on /r/d&d for upvotes. You play RPGs dishonestly, for the wrong reasons, and thus your "fun" is neither important nor relevant to ANY discussion of what a DM should do in a certain RPG situation. Simply put, you are not an RPG player, you are a poseur who got his start playing Cards Against Humanity and you think that the point of all games is to roar in autistic laughter. Guess what? It's not. There is more to these games than you will ever see or understand because you are too blinded by your smartphone-driven ADHD need for constant stimulation and interest. Go back to playing MMOs and jam your finger into the F1 key until your fucking heart explodes. No one really cares what you do, so long as it's not RPGs. They are not meant to make you laugh, they are not meant to be cheap easy entertainment, they are not meant to be comedy. Stop watching Roll20 and thinking that everyone is goddamn Matt Mercer and his roastie harem. It's not. This isn't fucking roosterteeth where you listen to a bunch of 20-something men chorusing their shitty laughter over a bad microphone so you can stream your game on Twitch for shekels. Just stop. You do not belong, stop raping a hobby that was actually about something good and creative, something that will never understand or are capable of comprehending, because it doesn't move fast enough for you, it isn't cool enough or hip enough or current enough for you. Just get out and stop making things difficult for everyone, including yourself.

File: Mr Rage on Gaming.png (16KB, 1641x336px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 1641x336px

>>52265583

You are an unfortunate person. I'm sorry life treats you like you deserve.

File: 0pastamaking1.gif (2MB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x400px

>>52277458

Okay this one legitimately made me laugh because I love how breaking apart paragraphs is apparently a reddit thing.

>>52277454
>See, your 'argument' ignores the fact that fun is a subjective and personal meaudurment that precludes quantification for a number of reasons.

No, I understand that. You didn't see me adding up numbers, here, did you? You can play whatever games you want but we are free to exlcude you. And some of us are getting sick of the normalfag invasion into TTRPGs and are starting to fight back.

> You're dead inside because all you can think about is how other people having fun in ways you disapporive of is not just bad, but horrible and should be disallowed, and furthermore all people who have fun differently are horrible. Your way is the only right way, and you're time and thought and skills are worth more than all others.

How does that mean I am dead inside. I fail to see how that mindset is depressing in any way shape or form, or that it means I lack empathy. I have empathy. I just think these people are fucking retarded. You could probably empathize with Ted Kaczynski if you tried hard enough, but that doesn't mean he's not still a fucking retard.

>>52277487
> the amount of fun a system gives a person is the only measure of its quality

Interesting.

D&D 3.5 probably has given more enjoyment than any other game except maybe 5e. But even so, 3.5 has been around longer, and thus for another few years, it will be objectively better than 5e, according to Mr Rage here.

Hmm maybe this stupid-ass tripfag doesn't understand a fucking thing about game design, and just because he types in all caps for his gimmick, doesn't mean he is right?

>>52277506
I mean the fact that you hit the enter button twice after quoting my post. Also, each sentence does not need a paragraph break. You're not writing a fucking essay. You don't need to hit Enter after every period.

>>52277514
>fight back agaisnt the invasion of normalfags
Anon...you are the problem with games. You have forgotten what the word 'play' means.

File: file.png (1MB, 954x641px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 954x641px

Let's instead talk about something actually important:
>Alfredo, Bolognese or Marinara?

>>52277458
Since you're something of an expert on the topic, what do you think?

>>52277561
Not him but you did that earlier

>>52277581

I prefer marinara, but with a bit of extra garlic. Add in some diced spicy Italian Sausage and serve with a side salad.

>>52277581
Depends on the noodle. In most cases I go for marinara, but if I got angel hair, I'll indulge in some alfredo.

>>52277578
>You have forgotten what the word 'play' means.

That's because I don't play RPGs. I live them.

>>52275541
I also ran a game with a guy who literally believes magic = 100% unreal = silly.
Therefore, every fantasy setting is silly "make believe" not to be taken seriously, ha ha ha ha ha!
To the point that he acted like rolling dice was funny.
He was not invited to a second session.

>>52275711
>Is it really always the same dude, or am I just seeing the same bait getting bitten over and over again?
Can you explain the functional difference?

Anyway, it was determined long ago that we're all just one really, really drunk Finn arguing with himself over the internet.

>>52276146
>RPGs aren't really THAT fun. They aren't fucking orgasms.
Yeah, you're definitely not doing it right.
Sorry about your loss pal.

>>52278015
.......and this is where you outed yourself as a schizoidal personality disorder suffering narcissist.

I think we're done here.

>>52278185
> tumblr-tier amateur mental health diagnosis
> "i think we're done here"

Nice job outing yourself as an idiot. Fortunately I don't need a medical degree to diagnose that one, however, you are not a psychologist therefore you cannot say any of the things you just said with any validity. This isn't Tumblr, you can't dump a bunch of shit you learned in your community college psych 101 class and pretend it has any merit.

>>52278061
Yeah I would kick that player too.

File: 1451628886776.gif (769KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

769KB, 320x180px

>>52278015
>I live them

File: CraftedPastaGolem_WhyDoILive.jpg (252KB, 721x1016px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 721x1016px

>>52276373
There is a phrase I heard once that I have a lot of respect for.
Try to hear it without any religious connotation, and instead think of it like "Nature abhors a vacuum."

Here it is: "God hates a purposeless thing."

So I ask you, "To what end?"
To what purpose was your post written?

>>52261809
fpbp

>>52276404
>Actually reasonable advice. Surprised other's don't agree
It's sound advice in a shit thread.
Like a breeze in a room full of flatulence, it's refreshing but not fully enjoyed as it might be elsewhere, especially by those choosing to remain cloistered in the cloud.

>>52276707
Heh
Okay, I laughed at that.

>>52261743
I don't. If player's aren't taking something seriously, it's either because my campaign isn't serious-worthy, because the players are nervous for some reason, or because they are the type that will never take it seriously. I'm not the type to get angry if someone isn't as invested into my magical realm as I am.

File: bitch.gif (1MB, 252x187px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 252x187px

>>52278015

You can pratically smell the fedora and cheeto dust

File: disapproval.jpg (2KB, 125x93px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x93px

>>52277581

>implying anyone in italy eats that shit amerifat call pasta

>>52276373
>You clearly have never played in one of my campaigns.
And I'm glad I haven't, you're an incorrigible autistic moron. I feel no need to read further.

>>52277561
amount of fun a system gives =/= total quantity given

If I eat at burger king every day for a month then eat at an all you can eat buffet, that does not mean burger king gives me a greater amount of food than the buffet.
If you're gonna be retardedly autistic in quantifying "fun", at least do it right, jackass.

>>52278470
Quite from an Italian American chick when presented with "pasta" at the university dining hall: "That's not pasta. That's Italian dog food."

>>52276146
>Fun=Lolsorandumb
I play for fun and can hold a plot. Hell, I regularly make "meme" characters and am more integral to the plot than a lot of people I play with. Some of my highlights include regular luchadores, an insane lizardman "knight", and a time-travelling Kobold supersoldier/wizard, and every one of them have been indispensable to the execution of the plot.
I think the problem might just be you, man.

>>52278650

I am still baffled on how people manage to do pasta so terribly,

I mean, they can get wrong the fucking cooking itself.

Most sauces I can understand, there are some that are quite difficult to get right, and some others that simply require eons of time.

But ffs how can you fail at cooking fucking spaghetti?

You have to get a pot of water to boil, and throw them in for 10 minutes with a pinch of salt.

>>52278270
Let's get real here for a second. You are defending who you are on an anonymous image board where nothing you say will have any lasting impact on anything whatsoever.
That is a narcissist. Being a narcissist isn't a good or a bad thing, it's just a thing. You know it, we all know it, you will never manage to convince anyone of anything in a heated 4chan debate. The only value to be taken is by yourself, about yourself. YOU totally won this argument, YOUR stance ha been adequately defended and vindicated. The only thing you are actually accomplishing here is stroking yourself off, m8. That's a narcissist. For better or for worse.

Fucking with them, they don't want anything to do with the story? I'll use the plot against them and make it their business.

>Don't want to go to the dungeon for the macguffin.
Word spreads that they're cowards, and NPCs will laugh at them, the ones that can send you into a lot of trouble will laugh in front of their faces.

>Don't want to track down a famous thief to progress the story.
They will find better equipment behind traps and puzzles, only for the thief to steal it after solving them.

>Don't want to fix the unstabble magic in a temple.
Said magic changes them into the opposite sex and/or turns them into their least favourite race.

>>52278896
>into the opposite sex
Jokes on you! That's my fetish!

>>52278696
>mfw I'm part italian and my mother taught me how 2 pasta
You don't need to put oil into everything, America.

>>52278696
They try clever shit like cooking it with milk.

>>52261743
Flogging

>>52278696
>You have to get a pot of water to boil, and throw them in for 10 minutes with a pinch of salt.
But my tv show doesn't have a commercial break until 15 mins, and who has time for salt?

>>52278597
I'm not the one being autistic about quantifying fun. I'm talking about Mr. Rage. Also how do you know what quality of fun 3.5 gave people?

>>52279009

>who has time for salt?

Half of the autists on this board

>>52278535
>I feel no need to read further.
Because if you did, your safe-space snowflake worldview would be challenged. Millenial gamers, everyone!

>>52278685
>Some of my highlights include regular luchadores, an insane lizardman "knight", and a time-travelling Kobold supersoldier/wizard, and every one of them have been indispensable to the execution of the plot.

Sounds like a shit plot. You also sound like a randumb retard. Just because you bully the DM into accepting your bullshit by making him look like a wet towel ass hole if he doesn't, doesn't mean you aren't a fucking twat who makes stupid characters because you don't give a fuck about the tone of the setting or the story, only about jacking off your latest "brilliant idea" into everyone's faces.

>>52279053
Ouch.

>>52279064
When you are sperging against the board, you can't exactly call everyone else snowflakes for having a common view that's opposed to yours.

Unless you want to try flogging.

I'd say its the contrary, actually.

>>52278997

Pouring a bit of olive oil into the pot keeps it from boiling over.

>>52278880

Stop virtue-signalling and finish your homework, kiddo.

>>52269490
As a player, sometimes it is frustrating when I want to take things more seriously, but others do not - or they take other things more seriously than I do, letting party conflicts turn into OOC fights while I just want to be curious about the plot thread the GM's set up and avoid the fact that everyone else just wants to fight shit and compete.

>>52279128
Well, yes.
But you are assuming its olive oil and that its just a bit.

>>52279039
>I'm not the one being autistic about quantifying fun.
Yes, you are.
I'll prove it in one moment.

>I'm talking about Mr. Rage.
Who was simply asserting that you can't quantify fun.
Not really wrong about the caps thing, but I've never seen him wrong.

>Also how do you know what quality of fun 3.5 gave people?
...and there you are, being autistic about quantifying fun.

Also here:
>D&D 3.5 probably has given more enjoyment than any other game except maybe 5e.

And likely elsewhere, but I'm not searching through the thread and you could deny being the same poster.

>inb4 but i was just talking about RAGE
I can dig it.
Doesn't change the fact that you were being autistic about quantifying fun.

>>52278880
By that logic, you are a narcissist just for arguing with me. So fuck off.

>>52279053
See
>>52278419
>Heh
>Okay, I laughed at that.

>>52279229
>Not really wrong about the caps thing, but I've never seen him wrong.

But he is wrong. Go back to my response to his post. I quoted pretty much exactly what he said. You're free to show how I took it out of context, but he said the only measure of a game's quality is how much fun it brought to people.

To which I say: D&D 3.5 was a game that brought enjoyment to more people than probably any other, yet it is considered a terribly-designed game by /tg/. If you agree with Mr Rage, you disagree with /tg/'s general opinion toward 3.5.

Also he literally tries to quantify fun after saying you can't two sentences ago. he is full of shit. He isn't deep or profound, he just says stuff that 90% of /tg/ already thinks and repeats constantly, but puts it in all caps. That is all he does.

File: richard-roundtree-and-samuel-jackson-as-john-shaft-and-uncle-john-shaft.jpg (39KB, 675x409px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 675x409px

>>52279363
>mfw you ignore the rest of my post
Ah, this old transparent move.
Fine.

>he said the only measure of a game's quality is how much fun it brought to people.
Yes he did.

>To which I say: D&D 3.5 was a game that brought enjoyment to more people than probably any other
We'll assume that's true for the purpose of discussion,

>yet it is considered a terribly-designed game by /tg/.
This too,

>If you agree with Mr Rage, you disagree with /tg/'s general opinion toward 3.5.
Ah, so close to getting his point, and yet you fail.
He is saying that a game can be good or bad depending on the subjective view of those playing, that any game that people have fun playing can be a good game, and that comparing them is retarded.

The fact that the game that has brought the most enjoyment, or fun, can therefore be considered a good game has no effect on it being a terribly designed game.

>Also he literally tries to quantify fun after saying you can't two sentences ago
He really didn't.
Try quoting it and I'll break that down for you too.

File: Disdain.jpg (40KB, 400x402px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 400x402px

>>52279064
>safe-space snowflake worldview
if you gonna bait at least try to be original

>>52261743
>punish
The only reasons to "punish" a player is if he fucked your girlfriend (not likely given this hobby) or if he does something colossally stupid in-game for teg lulz that he should logically be punished for. Like sticking his dick in the King's cereal.

>>52279064
>Just because you bully the DM into accepting your bullshit by making him look like a wet towel ass hole if he doesn't, doesn't mean you aren't a fucking twat who makes stupid characters because you don't give a fuck about the tone of the setting or the story, only about jacking off your latest "brilliant idea" into everyone's faces.
Strawman? Oh, funsies!
>Luchadore A: Rewired his backstory to include major events, people, and places of the GM's setting, marked the BBEG as having wronged his people. Regularly refocused the group when they got distracted and wanted to turn the Orc lair into their own brothel. and died heroically at the end of the campaign in a delightfully cheesy struggle to grapple said BBEG into the McGuffin superweapon that could kill it.
>Luchadore B: Employed as the bodyguard, manservent, and general bro of the "important" PC who was an overpowered Paladin/Cleric gestalt wad of nonsense that was the primary actor of the campaign. Concept aside, the most reasonable and grounded person in the party.
>Luchadore C: Wildcard melee fighter in a more investigative/socially minded game. Regularly ran interference and drew attention, and did stealthshit. Wound up getting glibbed by some sorcery.
>Insane lizardman "knight": As proclaimed by the DM, "His best friend" as he faithfully bit down on every plot hook dangled in front of him, fell for every ruse, and generally kept the game moving.
>Time Travelling Kobold Supersoldier/Wizard: Legitimized the magitek setting the DM was going for, as he was basically the end result of the technological revolution in play during the campaign.

A player having fun can absolutely further a campaign in a good way if you aren't shit at running it. If the only thing your players have in your campaign is character masturbation, that sounds more like you have given them nothing worth caring about, or maybe you're just a magnet for shitters.

>>52279148
I don't do homework anymore, kiddo, I give it out.

>>52261743
Have consequences for dumb actions

File: 12795509_913977298716452_4672240557085756174_n.jpg (13KB, 376x277px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 376x277px

>>52279988
Nice burn, dude

>>52278880
No, narcissism is a bad thing. It negatively affects the narcissist's life and the lives of people around them.

>>52261743
>How do you punish players who don't take your campaign seriously?
Lock them in your basement IRL and force them to undergo a series of deadly traps and riddles to make it out alive.

I don't know about punishing people but I wish there was a way to make them forget about Monty Python, Dr. Who, Harry Potter, The Avengers, etc. for a few hours.

>>52279988
Wow, I didn't think it'd be possible to actually find someone who was this deluded and narcissistic, even more so then your average /tg/ poster, I applaud you in your steadfastness to hold your delusion of you being a perfect GM and having totally no faults at all

>>52279988
Thanks for taking us all back to elementary school with your witty banter.

File: I stole this .gif because it was shiny, but now I kinda feel bad.gif (2MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x500px

>>52280555
>>52280509

>>52277506
Welp, that's another fetish gained

>>52280509
I think you replied to the wrong 'tard.

>>52279053
kek

>>52279064
My worldview? That I play games to have fun? Yeah, I'm sure your autistic nonsense would challenge that.

It's threads like these and people like op and that one faggot>>52277129 >>52276146 that shows how utterly toxic /tg/ can be sometimes
People used to be able to have FUN and enjoy discussing their favorite games on this board, now all anyone ever does is yell at each other that they are playing X game wrong and that their way of having FUN is wrong

>>52281291
Surely it's a testament to /tg/'s quality that the majority response was to remind them that there is no wrong way to have fun? Doesn't that matter more than the vocal minority insisting that isn't the case?

I shift the game to what the players want. The sillier they are, the more silly the game becomes.

>ITT You aren't enjoying my campaign in the way I want you to, so now I'mma REEEEEEEE

>>52281363
Remember to keep a few straightmen!
Both to amplify thr comedy and to link back should they want to get serious.

>>52279632
>The fact that the game that has brought the most enjoyment, or fun, can therefore be considered a good game has no effect on it being a terribly designed game.

So... argumentum ad populentum, anyone?

Y'know I bet you actually are Mr Rage making a desperate attempt to stay relevant. Fuck yourself.

>>52281291
>that shows how utterly toxic /tg/ can be sometimes
> toxic

There's that buzzword again. Wanting to have tabletop games get fucked up by normies, the way Europe is getting fucked up by Muslim refugees, is not "toxic".

You wouldn't go to a baseball game and act like a faggot and forget the rules then complain when you get excluded. Roleplayers have those exact same rights. Deal with it, or get the fuck out of our hobby.

>>52281291
You're not wrong in that OP and Autismo "Fun-is-a-buzzword" Faget III here are toxic.
However,

>>52281335
This.

And I for one am having fun seeing if the pasta is done enough to stick to the wall.
Plus there were some quality rejoinders in this thread.
Sometimes, when posters give us shit, we make lemonade and serve it right back.

>>52281456
First off fuck you
Second fuck you if you say my response is me losing an argument, this isn't an argument
Third you are a retard screaming at people that your interpretation of how people are supposed to enjoy a product is the only correct way
Fourth the vast majority of this thread disagrees with your view despite your insistence that you speak for all roleplayers
Fifth you are an autistic spergelord and the only one ruining roleplaying here is you
Sixth you are probably still going to keep up this shitposting crusade and ignore everyone else's opinions because you hold your own to be fact
And finally kill yourself

bravo, wow, "the way Europe is getting fucked up by Muslim refugees", oh my god, did you come up with all by yourself?

Next you reply back with "triggered", than I stop posting, then you feel smug with yourself for a short span of time before sinking back into depression, which you'll deny you have. After all, you want to make sure everyone on the internet thinks you're a winner because no one you know in real life would ever tell you that. No one "irl" cares about you enough to lie to you, and you're too unpleasant a person to be pitied.

But fear not! The length and intensity of my reply indicates that you've gotten under my skin, meaning you really did win, didn't you? After all, having emotions on the internet is a sure sign that someone has lost an argument. You know this, and so you've taken great pains to never display even a trace hint of emotion, here or in real life. (As a free hint, look into this and how it interacts with aforementioned depression). Displaying feelings is weak, feminine, and a telling trait of shit-eating liberal whiners. The fact that I've gone to such lengths to respond to you means you've won the emotional cold war. Except that this is a copy-paste I wrote up ages ago to deal with assholes such as yourself. So this requires as much involvement as your typical smug-anime-girl post. All I have to do is set up the opening of this rant to match your specific half-baked comment and fire away. So, maybe take the time you would have spent on your next comment examining the state of your life and the values you hold, you walking antithesis to human worth.

>>52281431
>So... argumentum ad populentum, anyone?
Wow...

Okay first, I don't think "populentum" means anything.
I think you mean "argumentum ad populum", appeal to the people, or the masses.

Second, I didn't do that in that quote.

Third, I didn't do that in that post or this thread.

Fourth, you kinda did, here:
>>52279363
>I say: D&D 3.5 was a game that brought enjoyment to more people than probably any other
Not really, but closer than I got to it.

Fifth, since we're apparently gettin' all Latino in here,
>Y'know I bet you actually are Mr Rage making a desperate attempt to stay relevant. Fuck yourself.
I suppose this would be "ad hominin"?
I am not MR. RAGE.
I'm not even Mr. Mildly Peeved.
I am just bemused by your pathetic flailing.

>>52280442

Just make a swear jar.

Every reference to Dr. Who, HP, or Marvel, you have to put in a dollar.

Every Monty Python reference, you put in two dollars. Three if it's a Holy Grail reference.

File: tumblr_mma616jT8l1qz8x31o1_500.jpg (54KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x282px

>>52281757
>>52281672
Heh, you counted like I did.
You might be Mr. Peeved though.
Calm down and laugh at the silly monkey that makes no sense but thinks he's a professor.w

File: 35311741.jpg (21KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x400px

>>52281836
Not that anon, but why haven't I seen this before?
This is almost a marketable idea.

>>52281836
>>52281939
Only works if they're on board with trying to not talk about those things and understand why you want it, otherwise you're That GM.

>>52261743
If my players aren't taking my game seriously odds are pretty likely that I'm doing a poor job of things.

>>52261743
First off, your idea of what makes someone take something seriously are retarded and wrong.
I've regularly had players take dress up time more seriously than even the most dire of liches.

Which color pretty pony you ride to the battle is a matter of goddamn life or death.

>>52282345
Well, yeah.
Same deal with rules I have at my table, too.
I let them know before we game to see if it's a good fit.
Though, this seems like the kinda thing that only gets brought up if there's an issue first.
But if I ask them to stop x nonsense, and they dont, then I set up the jar and say if they don't pony up the cash, they're out.

Maybe use the cash to buy products or pizza for the group, of my choosing.

>can never get a group of people to actually stick together from session to session
>start a campaign, it plays out for only one session, then nobody has the time and it's abandoned because we can't even collect most of the group
>be known as One Session Mike for that reason
>once decided to run WFRP 2 for friends
>I was totally hyped because it couldn't work out badly right, I finally managed to find proper schedules
>main personality of the group decides he will roll for everything "because that's how WFRP2 demands to be played"
>even though I said I want a more coherent story and that I think that rule is optional
>absolutely everything
>character creation is taking its 2nd hour because he encouraged everyone to roll for EVERYTHING, including eye color, body markings
>object to that statement
>"but anon, this is fun"
>so they keep rolling and filling the charts with every little detail
>including random name and number of siblings
>said main personality rolls the name Pol
>is a halfling outlaw
>we finally start
>turns out that his amazing character quirk is that he only speaks his name
>not because he doesn't know language, he refuses to say anything but his name
>then, after ROLLING FOR EVERYTHING and basically being a fairly, y'know, wanted person, an outlaw career and all
>decides that even though it says Outlaw as his class that he got a special decree from Karl Franz himself that says he is free to go
>which he produces to everyone he meets
>to everyone in-game, who, like me, is understandably sick of a retarded halfling only saying one word
>i run a combat encounter and say that we're done for the day
>"Hey One Session Mike when is the next session"
>never, this was shit
>"fuck you, One Session Mike"

At this point I wish I was a Forever DM because they at least get to run campaigns, but I will always be Forever Oneshot. I run wacky beer&chips dungeon crawls only. Nobody feels like investing into One Session Mike's shitty games.

>>52262479
Thos dude here is right

>>52261743
I force them to talk out what they dont like about my campaign. Then I ask them if they really want to play, because there are some other people wanting to join that would immediately take the free seat.

After that, I reconsider the way I made the setting and campaign, until I came to the solution that I have to let the players directly profit from being invested in the setting.
No one needs to take it seriously, and making the setting with the premise of your players taking it seriously comes close to making a shitty fanfiction and expecting it to be a hit.