Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1113453Yes but will the fucker bring snacks, now?

He's gone from the group. And his character is in the soup if he should ever return. Completely excised from the party. And still hunted by the bad guys.

But the bad guys are also not long for the world. We gave the information on how to get them to the right people. They are headed for extinction.

It just goes to show that a RPG Group can accept a lot of things, but not someone who never brings snacks.

Quote from: soltakss;1113479It just goes to show that a RPG Group can accept a lot of things, but not someone who never brings snacks.

Our game is a social creative hobby. The person must have some level of skill in at least one of the two. Social skills are more widespread in society, since they are useful just about everywhere, and in some respects the social part is more important, since often players will be coming to your home.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1113449I wanted to post an update on the campaign while I am fresh from it.

We won! We defeated the bad guys and cut the final cords that linked us to Mr. Special Snowflake's character tonight! We are free! And our characters are in charge of their own destinies. We got the victory condition on the campaign's biggest story. And the characters are now up for bold new adventures.

So the game continues. But in a new direction. And everybody is happy.

Well, I'm glad it all worked out for you.

This is an epilogue to the issues this campaign faced with that one player.

The GM went through his notes and realized that Mr. Special Snowflake's character was not built on the same standards as the other members of the party were. His character was built based on a method that the GM had not OK'd. And as a result, his character was not only massively powered way out of proportion with the other characters. But he used an optional disadvantages system that resulted in all of the other PCs having to deal with his overpowered character's problems. The GM did not approve that the optional disadvantages system being used at all.

When we started the campaign. We were given a sheet with all of what the GM wanted us to do and the rules we were to use. He kept it simple because he wanted to be friendly to new players. And honestly? I had not played in one of that GM's games in nearly a decade. So I was basically starting over from zero.

This isn't the first time Mr. Special Snowflake did this to a campaign. He's done it many times in the past. And has a long history of outright cheating in a variety of ways. Including leaving the state for a couple of years, and then suddenly come back and have his character's power level starkly increased from what it was while he was gone. With the excuse that he was playing private games while he was gone to account for those power increases.

Uh, no! I wouldn't accept that as a GM. And in doing that, he was taking advantage of his friendship with the GM in an extreme way. And the GM finally has had enough of these shennanigans. And Mr. Special Snowflake seems to be on one of his out of state sabbaticals again.

So this campaign has been through a lot. Survived a cheating player intent on making the campaign all about him. Bounced back and has a player group that is absolutely happy now.

So yes. This is an example of where just one cheating player can upend and dominate an entire campaign. But it also shows that player failed to ruin it due to the grit of the GM and players who just wanted a fun game. The fact it survived is entirely due to the other members of the group refusing to submit to that bad player's wishes.

I have put a lot into that campaign. Which has stretched into being many years in length now. I even designed miniatures for my characters on Heroforge and had them printed in solid Bronze. Cost me about $300 plus tax and shipping. But they make me happy. And showed the GM how seriously I am committed to the campaign. That I wanted permanent momentos of something I truly enjoy.

I don't count this story as a failure. But one of successfully surviving the devastation one bad player can bring to a game group. One where the GM and the honest players turned the tables and made success out of what started as a bad situation. And I believe that's a happy ending worth celebrating.

Sounds like a lot of good faith poured into a labor of love! How lovely. I would love to have players so involved to go to such extra lengths.

A pity the GM forgot the due diligence to be even-handed, such as doing a chargen audit, or forbidding untraceable PC table-hopping. It only takes one exploiter to ruin an environment of earnest good nature. Oh well, lesson learned. That's why GM best practices are there: to protect all parties by showing an active fair neutrality, because a transparent restraint for all invites respect & trust.

May you all go forward in harmonious fun!

So much trouble is solved by "roll 3d6 down the line while we all watch you roll, choose MU, cleric, fighter or thief, and start at 1st level." Yes, even if the rest of the party is 5th level - they'll gear the character up a bit and they can hang around the back cautiously and will quickly level up.

Snowflakes quickly melt under the heat of any kind of strict scrutiny. But I note too - the guy never brought snacks and shared them. That indicates a mindset which is not oriented to the happiness of the group as a whole.

In order: people, snacks, setting, system.

I was discussing this with Bill earlier, and he talked about how Dancey and Mearls polled people on their ideal session length, ideal time to get from 1st to 5th level, and so on - averaged out all the answers and designed 3e accordingly. This is like polling people on their ideal time of having sex, how many positions they want to be in, and what sex acts they want to engage in, and then putting them together with a random person and expecting great sex as a result.

It's not about all that, it's about the people you're with, and how willing they are to do things which will help others have fun.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1135390I was discussing this with Bill earlier, and he talked about how Dancey and Mearls polled people on their ideal session length, ideal time to get from 1st to 5th level, and so on - averaged out all the answers and designed 3e accordingly. This is like polling people on their ideal time of having sex, how many positions they want to be in, and what sex acts they want to engage in, and then putting them together with a random person and expecting great sex as a result.

Dancey and Mearls designed 3e?

Quote from: Shasarak;1135393Dancey and Mearls designed 3e?

Mearls didn't even work for WotC at the time!

3e was mostly Tweet Cook and I think Heinsoo?

Quote from: Shasarak;1135393Dancey and Mearls designed 3e?

Dancey 3rd, Mearls later.

Dancey was responsible for the surveys giving us the idea of the averages, and Mearls for the "20 minutes of fun packed into four hours" observation. Those two observations, along with a desire to imitate computer and card games, are responsible for much of the design of 3e-5e. Those two are the source of much of the rot.

Quote from: S'mon;1135398Mearls didn't even work for WotC at the time!

3e was mostly Tweet Cook and I think Heinsoo?

I would put my blame on Heinsoo.  Talk about the poster child for "You just had one job"

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1135390So much trouble is solved by "roll 3d6 down the line while we all watch you roll, choose MU, cleric, fighter or thief, and start at 1st level." Yes, even if the rest of the party is 5th level - they'll gear the character up a bit and they can hang around the back cautiously and will quickly level up.

I found that transparent but strict and vigilant guidelines for new or invited players to be far more helpful than any sort of lasseiz-faire policy and while I understand the idea of not limiting people's fun, it leads to all sorts of trouble in practice.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1135371This isn't the first time Mr. Special Snowflake did this to a campaign. He's done it many times in the past. And has a long history of outright cheating in a variety of ways. Including leaving the state for a couple of years, and then suddenly come back and have his character's power level starkly increased from what it was while he was gone. With the excuse that he was playing private games while he was gone to account for those power increases.

GMing 101... if it doesn't happen at my table, it doesn't happen.

Among other things, I insist that all rolls are made on the table, where everyone can see them.  It's not purely a matter of trust, it's a matter of fun... everyone should share in the highs and lows of a campaign.  If players are allowed to take characters off to another campaign, their experiences aren't really contributing THIS campaign.

Quote from: Tyberious Funk;1135487GMing 101... if it doesn't happen at my table, it doesn't happen.

Among other things, I insist that all rolls are made on the table, where everyone can see them.  It's not purely a matter of trust, it's a matter of fun... everyone should share in the highs and lows of a campaign.  If players are allowed to take characters off to another campaign, their experiences aren't really contributing THIS campaign.

I would go so far as to suggest the GM collect hard copies of all of the character sheets after the session. So the GM has records to dissuade monkey-business.

In the current campaign, the GM trusts the players to handle their sheets. But honestly? I don't feel comfortable doing updating and paperwork out of the sight of the GM.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1135371I don't count this story as a failure. But one of successfully surviving the devastation one bad player can bring to a game group. One where the GM and the honest players turned the tables and made success out of what started as a bad situation. And I believe that's a happy ending worth celebrating.

Congrats! It is worth celebrating! Hopefully, Mr. Special Snowflake's shadow will never cross your table again. It's not a failure if everyone at the table learned their lesson. One asshole can ruin everyone's fun which is why every asshole must be swiftly hurled from the game.