I actually try to reward my shy/introverted players more than the others when they do contribute to the game more actively or rather more IC, thus encouraging them in a positive way, rather than "punishing" them when they take the back seat to more proactive players. If I am enjoying the game, they're enjoying the game and the extroverts also enjoy it, there's no reason to penalize anyone.

Now, stinky or annoying people won't even make it into "my" group as it would mean that I don't get to enjoy my own game. If I were ever to run a convention game I would probably anounce in advance that cat piss men are not allowed in.

Quote from: Lord Hobie;434080Sounds more like the play-style of your fellow players is flat, not yours.

Shrug. I try not to place value judgments on others' fun.

Seanchai

I've known players that could not RP to save their lives. But they were decent people and part of the social group that played at that table. To kick them out would have been mean-spirited and cruel. They literally could not engage in that level of social interaction.

Should you reward good RPing though? Of course. But I would never penalize those that can't pull it off.

Just like I think there are players who, tactically speaking, couldn't play a D&D wizard to save their lives, there are also players who couldn't play a socially adept character to save their lives.  I don't think that they should be shown special favours to compensate for that anymore than a bad wizard-player should.

RPGPundit

Pundit, still curious, what do you mean in the OP when you talk about reward/punishment? Is it in a purely xp/in game reward way or is it more of giving a person less/more room to shine or is it something else?

Cheers.

Quote from: Spinachcat;434054I don't see why we would want to marginalize any player from enjoying our hobby.  

To keep out lawncrappers.

Honestly, there is a type of Player whose enjoyment of gaming revolves around pissing off everyone else at the table. That is the kind of socially inept Player that I do not want in my games.

Quote from: jeff37923;434347To keep out lawncrappers.

Honestly, there is a type of Player whose enjoyment of gaming revolves around pissing off everyone else at the table. That is the kind of socially inept Player that I do not want in my games.

Not gaming with these people is the best way of reforming them, or forcing them to leave the hobby. Passive-agressive in-game bullshit "punishment" tells me more about the GM's issues than the player's.

I once had an introverted player create a member of what was left of a pirate crew  who was actually the highest in rank among them. Since he didn't portray his  character as particularly authoritative or proactive the others took the  initiative most of the time, with the ship's cook taking charge :teehee:.
Did I penalize this player for bad roleplaying? No. His character was  just not a natural leader in spite of his rank. Nothing particularly  implausible about that. You see it all the time IRL. It brought up  interesting questions regarding the character's background and actually  made for a fun experience.

Quote from: jeff37923;434347(...)there is a type of Player whose enjoyment of gaming revolves around pissing off everyone else at the table. That is the kind of socially inept Player that I do not want in my games.

There's also a type of GM intent on doing that. Neither players nor GMs of this type make for a fun game so I'll just avoid playing with them altogether.

Quote from: The Butcher;434364Not gaming with these people is the best way of reforming them, or forcing them to leave the hobby. Passive-agressive in-game bullshit "punishment" tells me more about the GM's issues than the player's.

Dude, totally.

Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;434333Pundit, still curious, what do you mean in the OP when you talk about reward/punishment? Is it in a purely xp/in game reward way or is it more of giving a person less/more room to shine or is it something else?

Cheers.

Well certainly giving bonus "RP" xp to players who do a good job of presenting their characters in the social context, and not giving it to those who are not capable of that, is one simple way to do this.
Another is that if you have "social" rolls in your game a player who does a good job actually interpreting his character's social actions should get a significant bonus and those who fail at that a significant penalty.
If you don't actually use rolls, then obviously increasing the number of successes for socially adept players and increasing failures for socially inept players. I don't care if "you think your character should be good at giving a speech", or should know how to convince someone of something; if you suck ass at doing it, and the things you make your character say make him someone who would be  unlikeable, that should have a real effect in-game.

RPGPundit

Guys hated playing wizards in my D&D games, because if they couldn't make a real fireball from bat guano and sulphur, I took away d6s from their damage rolls.

That taught them fuckers.

Quote from: The Butcher;434364Not gaming with these people is the best way of reforming them, or forcing them to leave the hobby. Passive-agressive in-game bullshit "punishment" tells me more about the GM's issues than the player's.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;434366There's also a type of GM intent on doing that. Neither players nor GMs of this type make for a fun game so I'll just avoid playing with them altogether.

You have to know who they are first. Usually that leads to a catch-22 of having to game with them before knowing that they are shitbags.

Then there is the decision of whether or not you can train this shitbag to be an actual social human being that gets along with the rest of the Players. Or you can just tell the shitbag to fuck off.

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;434564Guys hated playing wizards in my D&D games, because if they couldn't make a real fireball from bat guano and sulphur, I took away d6s from their damage rolls.

That taught them fuckers.

+1

Wait, isn't this Reddit?

I encourage good play, rather than punish poor play.  I encourage the shy to become more socially adept & outgoing, which may require getting more domineering players to cede some limelight.  I tolerate the socially hopeless if they're not actively disruptive.

Quote from: S'mon;434586I encourage good play, rather than punish poor play.  I encourage the shy to become more socially adept & outgoing, which may require getting more domineering players to cede some limelight.  I tolerate the socially hopeless if they're not actively disruptive.

Not actively disruptive? I'd personally make this not disruptive, period.

I do expect every player to contribute to the game in a constructive manner. But I accept that shy or introverted players will do this in a somewhat different fashion; they'll typically have their character do stuff instead of say stuff, for example. I do not encourage them taking the backseat and just tagging along all the time.