What simple tool or bit of RP is guaranteed to weed out non-serious

>>54195456
"Everything is said in character unless you say otherwise"

So now when you go and talk about overthrowing the king, you get arrested, all your stuff taken and tortured. Shut up and play properly

>>54195456
Not playing with strangers over the internets. Shittery is immediately apparent after 5 minutes of face to face conversation.

File: 31aad36dc091af40fc792f0beee306e5.png (54KB, 1294x458px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1294x458px

Handing out a setting packet and testing people on the information in it.

>>54195456

Mandatory session 0. I'm looking for "can you show up," "can you show up on time," "can you be interested in and work with others," and "can you contribute serious ideas when appropriate" and if what I get back is "can't I just show up when the story starts?" I know the answer to all of them is "no."

>>54195456
"in this setting women cannot be any of these classes for longstanding cultural reasons. Taboo breaking, if caught, is severely punished."

>>54195456
Leave a MAGA cap on your coatrack. Do not talk about politics. If asked, answer noncommitally and say you prefer not to discuss serious issues in your downtime.

See if your players are able to accept not everyone holds the same views.

>>54195621
embarrassing for the dm

>>54195456
Is this the that guy thread?

GURPS

>>54195621
Kek, depressingly believable though.

>>54198025
What?

>>54195492
That sounds kind of fucking retarded, honestly.

>Sorry you didn't say "this is OOC" so I'm going to contrive a reason to punish you

to be frank, planning OOC isn't an interruption in gameplay, it IS gameplay, and if people are having fun discussing what to do then let them. Never get in the way of your players when they're having fun.

>>54198009

I'd be mostly confused about a non-american having one.

I'm all in favour of getting setting guides before a campaign starts because you can generally get a good idea of whether the game is going to be shit or not.

Red flags you can spot from setting guides:

>likelihood of railroading/MUH NOVEL stuff
>existence of Mary Sue NPCs/DMPC fodder
>DM's magical realm
>existence of shitshow races like kender
>if it's poorly done ~CREATIVE~ trope subversion shit, political soapboxing, or just Eragon tier generic fantasy

>>54198009
Christ

Have an intro campaign if you're playing with enough new people to be uncertain.

Don't use the players' real characters, just give them one-offs and tell them it's an introductory thing. Hell, explain why you're doing it, if you wish protip: it sounds condescending as hell to actually tell players you think they might be shitters. Always frame your concern about being someone else, without naming names, or maybe something vague like "how the group works together" and make it into a legitimate story thing - like the prologue in an adventure movie where some characters who won't really be important until posthumously do something heroic and then get killed and then the story focuses on the everyman protagonists far away from the events in the start.

That way you have some fun, intro the setting and some major concepts from it, see everyone play together, weed out the people who are at least so terrible they can't even keep up with a one-off let alone an ongoing story, and don't have to do some dorky shit like testing people.

>>54198088
To be honest, I've had enough games and settings start out as generic fantasy (or generic steampunk, or generic modern day, etc) and slowly get more and more unique and creative over time that it doesn't necessarily bother me.

>>54198099

>To be honest, I've had enough games and settings start out as generic fantasy (or generic steampunk, or generic modern day, etc) and slowly get more and more unique and creative over time that it doesn't necessarily bother me.

It makes sense. You need to get everyone on the same page before you can expand it outwards. It's why most book series don't include the weirdest stuff right in the first chapter.

>>54198065
This, I'd assume it was for memes.

I guess you could substitute in [local decisive political party], but mostly it just seems like a whole load of bollocks.
Unless you've had a lot of groups fall apart due to politics wherever you are, it's just a weird thing to do.

What's next, having a prop Qur'an lying around to ensure people don't freak out about religion?
Just fucking throw dice and talk about dragons, that's what we're here for.

>>54198055
"80 points in broadsword" shitter is the thing, though.

>>54198133
Yeah, but he's not actually going to play GURPS.

>>54198088
For example, if the setting guide is all about the great heroes who you should look up to and who could do everything and beat Elminster, Kirito, Rey and Cato Sicarius blindfolded and whose names are anagrams of the GM's girlfriend, those characters will probably be DMPCs or some other bad news.

Similarly if the race guide focuses on the mating habits of various monster races (and doubly so if there's rape/vore/watersports/mpreg etc) you're entering a magical realm (milder version: preoccupation with bdsm stuff, oiled up dudes etc)

Or if there's a really obvious and terrible political allegory, that never ends well (You must overthrow Lord Thrump, the evil landowner/King Soetero the Moorish Usurper)

>>54195492
The bandits look puzzled as your characters talk and belive d6 is some sort of code, they attack your party.

>>54198114
People often forget, especially in long-running series, how the first entry usually comes before some of the most well-remembered elements were actually introduced.

Take Star Wars for example. In the original movie, 'the force' is just a weird, vague energy generated by living things, it has mystical power and frankly isn't very well explained just what the fuck it is. And Darth Vader is just some badass bad guy dude with black magic. The Emperor isn't even named or shown, only mentioned in passing. It's not until the sequel that we get iconic characters like Yoda who tell us exactly what the Force is and what it can do.

It's not all that unfair to call Star Wars, the original film, relatively generic scifi specifically in the context of 1977, since Star Wars was a large defining point for the genre later.

Pretty much all series end up like that, with the first entries relatively simplistic and generic compared to what gets thought up later.

>>54198009
The funny thing is that this would work.

>>54198160
However, you also have to remember that games aren't the same as books or movies. In a book, the reader doesn't need to know anything about the universe and it can be introduced and expanded as the book progresses. A reader is passive.

In a game, on the other hand, a player is expected to make a character and participate actively in the story, so they need some information about the setting. Of course, most RPGs do provide some information about their setting, in the character creation manual (which every player is expected to read), including stuff like what races are available, what are their attitudes and properties and stuff like that, so starting without a setting guide is usually fine for most games.

But, there exist generic systems like GURPS or Savage Worlds that really specify nothing about a setting and nothing can be assumed, so some sort of setting guide and session 0 is very helpful to get players started.

Granted, nobody's going to read through a thousand page wiki of the setting before making a character, but a one to three pages that explain the basics of the setting is really not too much to ask. After all, if you're going to be playing a Star Wars game, you at least expect everyone to know that it's set in space, that the Jedi are a thing and maybe something about the factions.

>>54198248
Of course, but you'd be foolish to think any setting - and especially one in a long-running game - doesn't change over time. The mere act of creating factions and NPCs and so on changes the world. Often changes are introduced specifically because of the players - any GM knows the feel of scrambling to bullshit something new because the players did something they didn't expect.

I agree a few pages of basics is not too much to ask and I generally give much more because I enjoy writing and I clearly separate what is expected-to-know and what is fluff, as any GM who is also a writefag should do, but you have to realize 'basics' are always going to sound a little generic at the start.

>>54198009
What would work faster is casually mention you are a practicing muslim.
The maga types too often are god-fearing white people quick to be offended when you don't base everything on bastardized European myth or are treated as untrustworthy outsiders despite playing humans, in my experience.
>now come on, tell me my subjective experience doesn't count

>>54198058
The GM has established entirely reasonable grounds for mistrust, on top of looking less than capable.
Either is a terrible situation to be in with a GM, the root of every bad GM/player interaction is mistrust.

File: 1409165076757.jpg (168KB, 1016x970px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1016x970px

>>54198322
>>54198009

>>54198341
You'd maybe have a point if the poster didn't specify that he wrote the phrase in large red letters on the second page, such that merely opening the packet would have been enough.

Hell, if the other players didn't agree with it, they could have let other players know about the page in casual conversation.

The way I see it, that GM saved everyone some trouble, got an enjoyable game for himself and the players who are left and didn't have to deal with players who aren't a good fit for the group and game style.

>>54195621
I'm so glad I've never met anyone like this guy

>>54198349
Case in point, my actual irl experiences don't count because reasons, but I bet if I was sperging about women being shitty players, you'd agree immediately.

>>54198388
No I wouldn't, 2/5 of my current players are women and both are fine.

Can you take this /pol/-tier drama shit and fuck off with it?

>>54198377
Most people don't look on the back of the cover for information the GM said wasn't important. The first few pages are usually table of contents, credits and the like, not the meat of the book.
What you DO see is a GM who has no idea what those players were actually like, has shown that he is unwilling to deal with his players forthrightly and honestly, which puts all their subsequent decisions in a suspect light, and is intentionally pushing the pool of players towards one that does not accept the GM at their word.

>>54198025
>>54198387
>t. the two liars who got BTFO'd

Maybe next time you will learn to speak honestly and plainly instead of lying your ass off and making excuses.

>>54198411
I don't think you read that screencap right.

He wrote that shit on page one, at the top in obvious clear writing.
It wasn't hidden. There weren't pages of contents, it was four pages, total. One cover page, three with setting fluff topped with the red text alert.

>>54198411
Except there's no TOC or any of that bullshit in a 4 page booklet printed on a home printer by the DM, and the red text wasn't on the back of the cover but on the first page. What I'm seeing here is that you didn't read the quoted image.

In fact, he has been honest with his players, he said "read the booklet, it's important" and then it turned out to be important. If he didn't follow through with his threat then his honesty would have been suspect to the players who did bother to open it.

The only thing that's relatively bullshit in all of this is that the test was after session 0, what he should have done is distributed the booklet before session 0 so as not to waste any time, instead of wasting some time designing characters and all that shit.

>>54198411
Your bait really needs work, anon. Tut Tut Tut

>>54198322
I misread that as practicing medium at first, and was legitmately mad.

>>54198452

What's wrong with mediums? You shouldn't be small minded.

>>54198434
This is the kind of shit people like touhoufag would think is acceptable, for obvious reasons.

>>54198472
I should probably not hold my breath waiting for an actual argument because you are clearly baiting for (You)s

>>54195456
Be mindful that this only works if everyone else isn't already shitty. The most attentive person I've ever gamed with still needed to have everything explained to him at the beginning of every turn because he had poor hearing, the DM neither spoke up nor articulated particularly well, and other players frequently talked over the DM. Another player took a long time for each turn because the mechanics for his class were complicated, so the player had to re-explain things to the DM frequently.

>>54195621
That's actually a great idea. I'm using that.

I also ask questions about people's characters before each session starts. Anyone who struggles is out.
And I ban phones at tables IRL. Too distracting. Use your phone, you're out of the session.

>>54195456
Not playing D&D.

>>54195456
I ask everyone to fill out a questionnaire about their character before the first session. It's mostly basic questions; who does your character care about, where do they see themselves in five years, what's the motto they live by, and so on. It also includes the following:
>What's your darkest secret that, if discovered, would get you in serious trouble?
>List five things about your character that are average or unremarkable.

This has never failed to weed out power gamers and Mary Sue players from my games.

>>54195456
Just ask people to put their electronics away, show up on time and take the game seriously. These people are your friends, come on.

>>54199912
You know what you have to do, anon.

>>54199974
Nope, no idea what you're implying there.

>>54199912

The first one seems like it doesn't work for a lot of characters. I mean, how many level 1 characters have an honest to god Dark Secret?

>>54200025
Post it, derail the thread with response posts.

>>54200317
What does level have to do with anything?
>They lied about their age to get enlisted
>This isn't their natural hair colour
>Dropped out of wizard school
>No idea how to ride a horse
>Scared of heights
>They stole a sweetroll.

>>54200421

How would most of those get you in serious trouble if discovered?

>>54200435
Okay I forgot about that last part.

>>54198472
2hu is my waifu, don't bully.

>>54200462

Yeah, that's sort of my issue with the question. Most level 1 PCs (Or PCs in general) are not exactly hiding Dark Secrets or criminal histories or such.

File: aw you.png (147KB, 650x615px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 650x615px

>>54198009
The neat thing is, this works whether they hold the same views or not. If they care about your political beliefs, whether it's because they need validation of their own or because they're looking for a fight, that means they aren't going to be paying attention to the game and should be dropped.

>>54200435
>thinking anyone can steal a sweetroll and get away scot-free

>>54200435
>legal ramifications or dishonorable discharge, possible shaming from their community
>there are ways to make this interesting if you work it into your background, I can't be arsed to think of one right now though
>unregistered mage, enjoy being hunted down
>then why did you join the roughriders?
>you monster.

>>54198009
>>54200506
This is genius.

>>54198009
>MAGA cap
>with an "I'm with her" pin on it

>>54200530

So they only actually matter if you made sure to make sure they come up in specific situations? As most of the time 'I can't ride' isn't really secret OR likely to cause trouble unless you went out of your way to make it so.

>>54198467
I prefer larges myself

>>54200324
I think you have a screw loose, I don't understand a single thing you're saying.

>>54200317
Easy. Here are some examples from my recent games:
>I studied necromancy, which is highly illegal in this country.
>As a soldier I left three men for dead when we were ambushed, and am basically a deserter.
>My real father is a minor noble of a hostile nation, and I'll be stripped of my land and titles if anyone finds out.
>I helped nurse a feral beast back to health and now it's attacking people where I used to live.
>My father's a demon and I haven't shown any signs of corruption... yet.
>My first job was killing a nobleman's child for money.
>I'm a brainwashed sleeper agent for a shadowy organization and I don't know it.
>I'm part of a barbarian tribe that's been pillaging and kidnapping people from local villages.
>I'm a pirate, which is already a death sentence, plus I plan on stealing the treasure and running later on.
>I'm a former cultist whose job was collecting people to sacrifice to our dark gods.

All of these characters were 1st level.

>>54200560
Presumably, if your character has the dark secret "I can't ride a horse", there's a reason that's a dark secret and not just "some thing about me I don't mention out of nowhere".

So either there's an element of the character's backstory that relies on hiding this bit of information. Maybe he's got a reputation for being a famous outrider, but he's a charlatan. Maybe he's lied his way into joining the PC group and it happens to be a team of horsemen, but he's going to do his best to low-key learn on the job while keeping his cover because being in this unit gets him something he wants. We're reverse-engineering the "dark" part of the secret here to show how it can be eligible.

>>54200491
I run a game that currently has all of the players, who started at level 1, carrying some kind of secret.
>Bard owes a massive debt to criminal organization for paying for a ressurection for his dead mother
>Mystic is an amnesiac and secretly the headmaster of an old destroyed psionic academy
>Fighter's parents were cultists and he has been branded and fated to one day join them
>Rogue is actually nobility and his weird name, weird clothes and weird personality are not because he's a crazy homeless guy, but because he's from across the world.
>Gunslinger has been Planeshifted from the Shadowrun World into the setting's prime material plane, and as such is the true inventor of all firearms.

>>54200689
He means the questionnaire dude. He wants you to post it.

>>54198322
See? Even in text the MAGA cap works.

>>54200729
Oh, sure.
1) Who does your character love or cherish unconditionally, even if that feeling isn’t reciprocated?
2) Who does your character hate, possibly irrationally or without good cause?
3) Who loves or cherishes your character, even if you don’t feel the same way about them?
4) Who hates your character and has a completely justified reason for their hatred?
5) What’s your character’s biggest vice, compulsion, or quirk that gets you into trouble and makes things harder for you?
6) What event made you the person you are today and shaped the way you see the world?
7) What code or belief does your character hold, one that would be tested or bring your character into conflict with others?
8) What drives you to seek adventure, even if it puts you in deadly peril?
9) Where does your character see themselves in five years? What deeds have they accomplished?
10) Describe a moment of weakness your character experienced that they needed help to overcome.
11) Describe five things about your character that are 'average' for a person of your race, class, or culture.
12) What's your darkest secret that, if discovered, would get you in serious trouble?

>>54195621
As a player, getting a setting packet, or any kind of homework really, is a gigantic red flag.

>>54200854
Stolen for use as a character building exercise.

>>54195621

That's actually good. I don't want a person to play a statblock, I want them to play a character.

>>54200854
So basically the point of this is "just have an answer, it doesn't have to be phenomenal it just has to make some degree of sense" right?

>>54200854
Been a DM for 15 years and honetly at least half of the points could be legitimately shrugged off with a "I have no interest/love/hatred/vice/substance abuse/objective apart from surviving and earning my food".
Others are good enough to start building a PC, but the last one is fucking specialsnowlfake-ism of the lowest genre, because one or at most two PC on a party of five could have such kind of background.

>>54201052
No. If your answers aren't up to the GM's incredibly high standards then you don't get to play.

>>54200530
I can be arsed. If you are in an east Asian setting, not having black hair may very well brand you as a foreign devil or bastard child. Japanese people with light brown hair need to colour it to attend school or go to work even today (not always, of course).

>>54198123
The issue with leaving out a MAGA hat as a joke is that your players might see it and think you're the kind of cunt that owns a MAGA hat as a joke.

Ironic MAGA sits next to "Hitler actually had some good ideas" as shit you should outgrow before you leave high school.

>>54198160
>>54198248
>>54198264
Striking a balance between unique and interesting content and relatable, digestible content is always a problem (for me at least).

>>54200854
If nothing comes to mind immediately, I take it I can add things to my character? Even if it takes like, almost an hour? I'm reconstructing it for some past characters and no. 1 and 9 are sometimes problematic.

>>54200866
You've got to put in some work. GMs bust their ass. You should at least have to do some light reading.

>>54201336
There are so many things wrong with your statement that I don't know where to start.

>>54200854
For me, backstory usually falls flat compared to in-game developments. I've had multiple character's that ended up contradicting their backstories because actual play develops a better character for me than whiteroom statements.

>>54200879
Go for it. Add or remove stuff that's relevant to the tone of your game. I prefer NobleDark low fantasy so the questions are tailored for that, especially 12.

>>54201052
Right, you need an answer that makes sense, it doesn't have to be detailed or well written. For question 6 one player wrote up three paragraphs about a friendly priest who inspired them to become a healer, another just wrote "After watching my squad-mates die in front of me, I've become jaded and keep people at arm's length." Both were great answers.

>>54201071
You can make a character with zero relationships, objectives, or quirks but they'd be really boring. Regardless you're the GM, if you don't like the idea of asking these questions to your players nothing is forcing you to.

>>54201092
Any answer that makes sense is good enough for me. It sounds like you're projecting to me.

>>54201309
Sure, you'd have plenty of time before and after we start playing. I send players the questions and the 'elevator pitch' of the campaign two weeks before we play. That gives them one week to answer those questions and to have a Session Zero, and another week for me to adapt my adventure to their answers.

Question 1 can be answered pretty simply; family members, pets (current or former), lovers, or even authority figures can count. One of my players cares deeply for his 'Uncle', a higher-up in the thieves guild who has been his mentor for a decade. Another player loved his dead wife, a third cared about her estranged brother. Question 9 is tougher, I can't give much advice other than to figure out what your character wants in life.

>>54198322
>The maga types too often are god-fearing white people quick to be offended when you don't base everything on bastardized European myth or are treated as untrustworthy outsiders despite playing humans, in my experience.
Nice projection, nerd.

>>54198411
>Most people don't look on the back of the cover for information the GM said wasn't important. The first few pages are usually table of contents, credits and the like, not the meat of the book.

It's four pages, you hopeless spergo.

>>54200473
He's talking about touhoufag, an annoying person who frequents /tg/.

>>54201396
The questions exist to establish who your character is at the start of the story, not to dictate everything they'll do. I'll give an example with a few extra flourishes:

Macbeth
1) Lady Macbeth.
2) Thane Cawdor the traitor.
3) Banquo, my closest friend.
4) Thane Cawdor.
5) I am overconfident on the battlefield, yet sometimes paralyzed with cowardice.
6) Marrying my wife. Her counsel has steered me right for many years. I treasure her deeply.
7) I am loyal to my wife, and would do anything for her.
8) For king and country!
9) Happily married, perhaps with children, serving my king.
10) Banquo has saved my life on the field of battle, without him I would be dead.
11) Brown hair, average height, scars from the field of battle, superstitious, deeply loyal to King Duncan.
12) I am ruthless and nothing is beneath me. Only my friendships and the counsel of my wife keeps my boundless ambition in check.

This describes him at the beginning of Act 1. It's where he starts, not where he ends, which is the critical part.

>>54201800
Sometimes where they supposedly start isn't even where they should. Spontaneous (but consistent with what has been played so far) characterization that contradicts the written backstory leaves a bad taste in anyone who read the backstory's mouth. I feel that if it doesn't contradicts what has actually been played so far, then it should Trump whatever was written solo before the game even started. But a lot of people take the backstory as an absolute for the character.

>>54201654
I know, we call him 2hu, but only if you're close to him.

I would unironically play with most of the people in this thread.

>>54198063
>>54195492
need more opinions on this

>>54198088
>>if it's poorly done ~CREATIVE~ trope subversion shit, political soapboxing, or just Eragon tier generic fantasy
elaborate on all of them

>>54199912
what if you answer with shit like
>he doesn't care about anyone but himself
>he sees himself dead in five years, which is why he became an adventurer
>he has no motto
And the like? Would you kick him? What if the character was a narcissist, or maybe the word is nihilist? Anyway what do you fucking do

>>54199912
Your the only one I wouldn't like playing with. Just shoves everyone into a corner when making their backstory. You're basically writing it for them at that point & just sounds like a general autist.

>>54205913
>he sees himself dead in five years, which is why he became an adventurer
why would he spend the next 5 years in constant danger if he could wait for his death in peace? Last chance to do something great? Seeking a cure for whatever he has? Wishing to make enough gold to make something outlast him?
>he has no motto
is there a way to describe his actions? "tries to get as much money, fuck anyone that gets in his path" "Helps those that help him" or "every man, woman and beast for themselves. If you can't survive on your own I'm not going to help you"?
>he doesn't care about anyone but himself
why is that? Is he a pure narcissist? Is he jaded? Has he lost everyone he cared about? Normally people don't only care for themselves.

I'm not the questionaire anon, but if a potential applicant would not be able to answer these questions or answer them with non-answers ("he just doesn't care", "he just goes adventuring without reason" and "he follows no motto") then I'd at least kick him

Answers like "He was born a narcissist", "he's dying and has nothing to lose anyway" and "he behaves like X" would be okay with me

>>54206041
and just to clarify that last sentence:
I mean it more like "He has been a narcissist from his birth. He never made many friends due to him not caring. It impacted him like XYZ.", "he's dying and wants to go out fighting, not in his sleep" and "his behaviour can be summarized as X"

>>54201390
Not him, but start anywhere. I'm curious why expecting players to have basic setting knowledge is wrong.

>>54201390
have to agree with >>54206220
please explain

>>54208588
You sure added a lot to this conversation

>>54209242
just as you did

>>54195621
In a vacuum, that's funny as fuck and kind of clever. I'd feel weird pulling this on anyone except Roll20 randos though.

>>54203857
That's because they lock down frigging everything.

Let me give an example.

Rookie: Jeff picks pockets because he likes money.

Pro: Jeff picks pockets, because he wants to buy a fancy car and impress the big-tittied waitress at the diner he frequents.

Rookie who thinks he's a pro: Jeff is exactly 5'11" with light blue eyes, sandy brown curly hair, and is wearing a flannel with red stripes and a white undertone, with a fancy necklace around his neck that he got in a carnival game that he once played with his dad.It was the happiest moment in his life until he met Sally in an elevator on the corner of winston and 4th blvd on his way to the lawyer's after finding out that he wouldn't get a single cent of the inheritance when uncle Tom died. He enjoys 8 oz sirloin cooked medium rare, and was formerly a world-cup stacking champion as a youth, which gives him great dexterity, and makes him very methodical and competitive. In his free time, he assists with his niece's ballet recitals for poor crippled children as a cameraman.

Some of you may stick up for the last one. The problem is, is that it gives us a character with a great amount of baggage and development in the past, versus being able to organically develop and grow in the future.

>>54209757
>5'11"
Ew, fucking manlet

Why don't people just veto the actions of players when they are clearly disruptive, with previous approval of the rest of the players?

>Bad player: So I kill him and take his loot
>GM: This looks disruptive to me. What do you guys think?
>All other players nod in approval
>GM: Vetoed. Do something else, this doesn't happen.

>>54209822
Because no one wants to play in Stalin's table.

Let people play as they please, don't run be a Tyrant using "Tyranny of the Majority" to back you up.

>>54209891
fuck
>don't ruin the game by being a Tyrant using tyranny of the majority as back up
fixed for me. If you put the entire table against me, I would walk away right away.

File: IMG_0152.jpg (133KB, 392x500px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 392x500px

>>54201336
One pic to resume every player's thoughts when getting a packet

>>54198055
I see. You check to see if there are autists by offering a shit system and seeing who spergs out, who creams their pants at the thought of combing through 12 splats, and who can reasonably suggest a good game for your concept that isn't generic mush.

>>54209891
>>54209913
>Let people play as they please
The matter is clearly to avoid this when it comes to disruptive players. Too much freedom is bad, you know.

>If you put the entire table against me, I would walk away right away.
No I'm not putting the entire table against you. If the entire table is against you then you clearly did something wrong; if other players disagree with an action being vetoed, then the bad judgement call is from the GM.

"We are not going to play any edition of d&d or systems like pathfinder that are d&d in everything but the name"

>>54209964
>If the entire table is against you then you clearly did something wrong; if other players disagree with an action being vetoed, then the bad judgement call is from the GM.
And then its me vs the GM.

Again, no reason to continue playing with you if you behave like that.

>Too much freedom is bad, you know.
Holy kek this can't be real

>>54200551
>>with an "I'm with her" pin on it
This would show you are testing them

>>54198093
Legitimately this. I have a BBQ and we play some rules-light thing - doesn't matter what, I judge them based on whether they can have a real conversation without memeing.

>>54198248
A gameworld will expand too. I've had days worth of social interactions where the fact that there are continents outside of North America literally never came up. You can introduce stuff later on as things the PCs always knew, but never held to be relevant.

>>54209987
>And then its me vs the GM.
No? Because if I make a bad judgement call the other players are going to call my bullshit on it.

Hear me out. There is no one vs no one. No one is enemy of anyone else. The GM is a moderator of sorts, they must make sure the game flows smoothly for EVERYONE and not just one player who suddenly is behaving like a murderhobo when the rest of the table is following the plot. The GM must ensure that everyone has fun, and when the fun of one player removes from the fun of the other players and the GM then the GM is the one responsible to call them out and stop them on their track.

And honestly speaking, calling out to veto actions that are disruptive is in my opinion much better than having to either deal with that action or kick the player out. It lets the game to flow smoothly.

>Holy kek this can't be real
It is. If you take the freedom to do whatever you please while disrupting other players, then you're abusing your freedom.

File: Donald Trump thumbs up.jpg (31KB, 645x363px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 645x363px

>>54198009

>>54200317
That seems like it would backfire, because any Sue would take the opportunity to make themselves the daughter of the BBEG or similar. Usually they need to work for that level of spotlight.

>>54210077
>It lets the game to flow smoothly.
Right, by disrupting the flow of the game to call out a player.
I get it, you are a railroader. You are a bad GM.

And yes, it is one vs one, or one vs everyone. Because your interruptions have a psychological effect on all the players, specially the one you call out. Now they will forever wonder "should I do this? no, maybe Stalin will get mad at me if I do this"

Listen buddy, the game flow doesn't need a constant police officer, it just needs a guy to tell you what consequences the actions of the players have, nothing more. So be a fascist elsewhere, tabletop is for freedom of mind.

File: Depression.jpg (185KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1920x1080px

>>54205101
I would ironically play with them, because I'm desperate for a game and don't care how shit you are so long as you can roll dice and don't want to fuck ponies.

>>54210166
>I get it, you are a railroader. You are a bad GM.
You can't make arguments without falling on fallacies (strawman, ad hominem), can you?

No, I'm not a railroader. If my players want to do something I haven't scripted out they're free to do so. If I have to change anything I might have planned or do some improv, that's great.

But if a player is going to shit all over the rest of the players or the game by doing disruptive play, they can go fuck themselves.

>Now they will forever wonder "should I do this? no, maybe Stalin will get mad at me if I do this"
Apply common sense?

>Should I kill this friendly NPC randomly without any reason?
>Should I attack this player just because I (the player, not the character) feel like it, even if my character doesn't usually behave like this?

Story opportunities only happen if they are within a given context and when the other players agree this is good for the plot; otherwise it's disruptive.

>Listen buddy, the game flow doesn't need a constant police officer, it just needs a guy to tell you what consequences the actions of the players have, nothing more. So be a fascist elsewhere, tabletop is for freedom of mind.
>RPGs only can be played in one way, my way
Guess who's the fascist here. Also don't talk to me condescendingly, we're supposed to have a civilized argument, not insulting each other.

>>54210280
>Guess who's the fascist here.
You of course. I'm saying Games can be played a million ways, however the players want. You are saying games can only be played the way you like it or "they can go fuck themselves"

I wasn't insulting you for the sake of insulting you. Its literally what I got from your previous post. That if they kill a plot relevant NPC you freak out and call out on the player. Because you are a railroader. Railroaders are bad GMs. So I called you a railroader, and a bad GM, which is what you are.
If your plot was so good or interesting, the player wouldn't feel the need to ruin it. But your plot sucks, and your players know it.

>Story opportunities only happen if they are within a given context
No, story opportunities can arise ANYWHERE. A good GM would make a plot out of an unexpected murder. Not you though, you cry and bitch about disruptiveness of your precious plot, instead of working your way out. And the best part is, you become disruptive yourself while trying to stop disruptiveness.

>Apply common sense?
Oh yes, just like its common sense for SJW to attack videogames, or how it was common sense when the Nazis burned porn books. Again, you are a tyrant, a police officer. You take pride in that. You shouldn't be GMing.

Pick one of the players that understand the game of pretend is about freedom of choices and make him GM, if you have any of those players left. I wouldn't be surprised your entire table is trash.

>>54209938
You already had to read the core rulebook for the game. What's the point in getting bent out of shape over another few pages?

File: oJRFyNE.png (2MB, 956x1482px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 956x1482px

>>54210441
>implying players read the rulebook

>>54210473
No player I'd keep around is the kind of idiot who can't read a fucking corebok.

>>54210505
>corebok

Goddammit. Now I'm catching the illiteracy.

>>54210409
>You are saying games can only be played the way you like it or "they can go fuck themselves"
In my games. If anyone else GMs as they please it's up to them.

>That if they kill a plot relevant NPC you freak out and call out on the player
So that's what you got?

What if the plot relevant NPC was supposed to be killed anyways?
What if the player actually had GOOD reasons to kill them? Vengeance or whatever.

I'm not going to call out a player for that.

I'm definitely calling out a player if they suddenly go out to murder people without any reason. Or rape just because.

You don't get what "disruptive" means, do you?

>If your plot was so good or interesting, the player wouldn't feel the need to ruin it.
You know, there's a thing called "communication", you should learn it.

>Dude your plot isn't good, I'd suggest doing this or that next session.

Is it this difficult to have a talk if you don't like something? Why should I put up with passive aggressive players?

>A good GM would make a plot out of an unexpected murder
Only if there are equally good players capable of following that plot.

In a superheroes game where I was a player, one other player outright murdered regular humans even if they supposed no harm to him. We had to call him out on his bullshit, and gladly he was alone. Instead of punishing the story to make it more believable the GM decided to somehow "lightly punish" the character and keep it at that.

Both are acceptable solutions, but I would have vetoed him murdering the humans. Because it doesn't make sense for his character.

>Oh yes, just like its common sense for SJW to attack videogames
Strawman much?

>I wouldn't be surprised your entire table is trash.
I haven't set up a table as of late for reasons not listed in any of my posts and unrelated to my GMing style. And the tables I have GMed... In most of them I learned how to GM so I got a lot of things wrong, but I believe if I were to do it again I'd do it much better.

>>54210556
What a whole bunch of nothingness, what happened?
>In my games. If anyone else GMs as they please it's up to them.
No message here.
>So that's what you got?
No message here.
>You don't get what "disruptive" means, do you?
No message here beyond pedantry.
>You know, there's a thing called "communication", you should learn it.
No message here beyond pedantry.
>Is it this difficult to have a talk if you don't like something?
Its not your job to speak because you don't like something. You just deal with the consequences of your players, that's your job.
>Why should I put up with passive aggressive players?
Why should they put up with you? Again, you are not fit for a GM.

>Only if there are equally good players capable of following that plot.
EXACTLY, good players follow your railroad right?
>Both are acceptable solutions, but I would have vetoed him murdering the humans.
And I believe you, you are Stalin himself in tabletop form.

>I haven't set up a table as of late for reasons
I seriously hope you never GM again. You don't know how to Gm.

>>54210694
Whatever dude this argument is getting stale. You keep using those "Stalin" and "railroad" buzzwords without giving a single meaningful argument and without recurring to strawmanning, and just telling me your judgement about how I am a bad GM - and honestly though I don't really give a shit about what you think about me.

Have a good day!

>>54210762
If you stopped telling me that good players are the ones that follow your plot. I wouldn't call you out on using a railroad.
If you stopped claiming you kick out anyone you don't like, I wouldn't call you Stalin.
They aren't buzzwords, but your existence is one. And it should disappear.
>and honestly though I don't really give a shit about what you think about me.
Of course you don't. I never expected a tyrant to change his mind!

>>54209757

Thank you for this. I've never been able to articulate why I'd rather play in a game where you start with a blank sheet and fill it in as you go than one with 15-page back stories. This finally explained it for, and to, me.

>>54209913

You're right about the part where you leave, at least.

>>54209891

"Tyranny of the Majority" is the "whine of the outvoted." Fuck you for thinking you can hijack the game all by yourself.

>>54210077

Save your breath. The only "freedom" people like this can imagine is the freedom to be an asshole without consequences. Then they spend the rest of their lives pissed that they don't have it.

>>54211545
>being this much of a cuck that you think its okay to oppress minorities
dumb trumpposter

>>54211545
>whine of the outvoted
Sounds great until it's used against you

File: 8044118790962.jpg (29KB, 605x421px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 605x421px

>>54211555

>>54209757
>>54211513

Here's more articulation if you, or anyone else is interested. So, we have three variants of the same backstory:

The Vague
>Jeff picks pockets because he likes money.

The problem is this one is that it's far too vague. We know who he is, but why does he do what he does? What type of person is this? The only definite thing we have is that he picks pockets, but there's no drive, no oomph that creates identifiable motives.

The Overly Specific
>Jeff is exactly 5'11" with light blue eyes, sandy brown curly hair, and is wearing a flannel with red stripes and a white undertone, with a fancy necklace around his neck that he got in a carnival game that he once played with his dad.It was the happiest moment in his life until he met Sally in an greasy spoon on the corner of winston and 4th blvd and they chatted about how cool the Lotuis Elise Cup 250 is, which helped him get over finding out that he wouldn't get a single cent of the inheritance when uncle Tom died. He enjoys 8 oz sirloin cooked medium rare, and was formerly a world-cup stacking champion as a youth, which gives him great dexterity, and makes him very methodical and competitive. In his free time, he assists with his niece's ballet recitals for poor crippled children as a cameraman.

While this may seem like plot-hook galore, the problem is that this type of backstory pretty much locks Jeff into an inflexible character, with little to no wiggle room to grow without treading over one of these established precepts. While a dramatic event may change him, the problem is that those types of world-shaking events are also very specific as well, resulting in a campaign that distorts to fuck and screw around with Jeff--a problem for the GM who needs to cater to more than one player.

(1/2)

>>54211678
The Sweet Spot:
>Jeff picks pockets, because he wants to buy a fancy car and impress the big-tittied waitress at the diner he frequents.

I hold this one to be the best because it establishes and implies multiple things about Jeff without bogging him down. Jeff has a clear motive in life, to get the girl. Why? Because Jeff likes good-looking things, and isn't above petty crime to obtain them. This Jeff could have a multitude of things happen to him that might affect his life, and none of them need to be built on pre-established ideas, granting him more flexibility in how he can react to the world. A lonely, attractive neighbor moving next-door to this Jeff might shift his life—but for the Jeff before, nothing happens because Sally is established as the best thing in his life, and having a new woman be the best thing introduces this weird idea of him holding on to a one memory for a long time, but it somehow shifts to whatever new spark is in his life, which doesn't make sense.

Backstories need to hit that zone—specific, but not enough that how your character reacts is set in stone from the start. Some settings or games may need more lines than this, but I hope this makes sense and y'all can see what I'm getting at.

(2/2, done.)

>>54205851
I get where both sides are coming from and think it can be done well or poorly.

Like a dick dm could certainly just be a petty asshole about it and have obviously out of character talk and jokes happen in-game to force scenarios for railroading or punishing players. On the other hand, to a certain extent planning for how to approach an encounter and what actions to take can and should take place in-character or it's basically free telepathy and time-stop for players to pause the world and have a full meeting on what to do. That just leads to more metagaming and less roleplay.

For an example when that guy asks about killing the king it's reasonable for others to tell him to fuck off but if he really presses it then they'll have to use sense motive or whatever to figure out in-character what he's planning and proceed in-game. A party standing around outside a shop debating ways to swindle a merchant can probably be assumed to be discussing it, though perhaps at least trying to keep it down and amongst themselves.

As in most cases, it takes discussing things honestly and openly like adults instead of being autistic manbabies, which leads to issues for some people.

File: wesker1.jpg (161KB, 558x529px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 558x529px

>>54198009
Fucking genius

>>54200736
>>54201573
Shit, the muslim thing really works, we weeded out two already.

>>54198009
But this also filters out people who don't want to play with shitposting memesters, anon.
Do you want to play exclusively with people who condone shitposting? Because your test says you do.

>>54209938
What the fuck is wrong with you people if you don't like reading books?
Everyone I have ever goddamn met who played tabletop enjoyed reading fucking tabletop books.
I can only assume that you do not in fact play tabletop.

>>54195456
Ask them if they have any red flags. If they do, immediately eject them from the game. This will save you so much time and effort.

>>54205864
>~CREATIVE~ trope subversion shit
"My demons are actuallty good guys!"
>political soapboxing
"Anarcho-syndicalism is the best, all factions without anarcho-syndicalism are evil treacherous bastards"
>or just Eragon tier generic fantasy
"You all meet in a tavern in Waterdeep..."

>>54210077
>>54210280
>>54210762
>replying to dedicated baitposters
Just hide the posts anon. It's not hard.

>>54195621
that's fucking terrible and i would never play with such a DM.

>>54195492
Dumb. Really really dumb.

>>54198063 said it best, but it bears repeating ( or re-linking) because it needs to be hammered home.

Planning OOC is fine. If you really need to, have some from of physical cue to indicate when they are talking in or out of character.

But just saying EVERYTHING is in character, wait to punish fun is really fucking dumb.

>>54211692
The way I always recommend to people is to work out what they do and why they do it, but not why they want to do it.

So Jeff steals things because he likes the good things in life, but why he steals instead of any of the other ways to get those things is keft to be determined in play.

>>54214643
I had no idea and no one cared to warn me in time. I couldn't have known they were a baitposter.

>>54201336
Yeah, but most homebrew setting are shit. I'd rather the GM bust their ass making good adventures not coming up with a stupid place names.
Have the lore stuff reveal itself over time through gameplay because that's what I'm here for, the gameplay. Not to be quizzed on your fantasy heartbreaker.

You can easily have interesting, immersive story without shoving pages of fantasy politics and nonsense words down the players throat.

Demanding we care about your bullshit is masturbatory. I say this as someone who usually GM's

>>54215431
Look anon, I have to do a homebrew if you are going to be living on the highlands and plunging into the insect infested lowlands full of poison mist.

There is no game that has a nausicaa/hammerfight vibe by default.

>>54215264
You could have lurked.
It's fun how so many Facebook refugees can parrot 4chan slang and hold up "4chan rules" when it's convenient, but don't have a single clue about lurking.
To refresh, because of 4chan being an anonymous imageboard for the sake of free opinion exchange, and because it works differently from a lot of other sites (as in the one you came from) you've been expected to lurk for half a year and up, up, up in order to make sure that refugees from the retard pit of the day don't just make it into their own circlejerk with tripcodes and IRCs.
What happens when people don't lurk is that idiotic rumors spread, the quality of discussion drops, people start reenacting Facebook drama, it becomes harder to say one's opinion for pocket admins and drama, and in general worsen the quality of the site.
4chan was shit since I started using it in 2007. It was a different kind of shit, though - a carefully curated shit exhibition, with people cooperating to produce different shades of shit.
Now, all we have is a hole in the ground that 14-year-olds who drink nothing but energy drink and Tumblr landwhales who've ruined their digestive systems with trend diets shit in as they like, and nothing has been done since 2010.