Quote from: Willie the Duck;992026Or you could just say, "guys, I'm really not interested in GMing this."

That is logically presumed in "asking for respect," because you are having The Table Talk by then. Beforehand you are logically presumed in "expecting respect" because you've shared your play expectations and table ground rules. By the time we get to "demanding respect" we're getting into punishments for breaking explicit ground rules twice.

If you mean giving up the campaign in response, you're nuking the table instead of laser-removal excising of the problem. The troublemakers, they're already not listening to you. Anyone on the fence, they're now bystander victims. You've just made a fun new game for those trolling you, how fast we can spoil the GM's fun AND any hapless victim at the table by nuking the table.

Trust me, hyper-competitive munchkin trolls derive their fun from others' misery. It's toxic and infectious behavior, and they know it. You spoil their fun first, kick them out as needed, and concede nothing to their twisted meta-game. It's the only way to be sure. That IS the most adult thing to do.

I think we're just seeing different scenarios within DavetheLost's situation. I'm reading it as an entire group what wants to play what I will call 'kick in the door and fight the orcs' style play, while he wants to DM a more strategic game. That, to me, is a DM-player-expectation-mismatch. You (if I'm following) see more of a situation where there are a few ne'er-do-well, trollish types.

The correct response is undoubtedly different. I'm just having difficulty reconciling the statements of demanding respect with something bearing a trigger next to their (PC's) kneecaps and the idea the I/you/we/team-DavetheLost are somehow the mature, adult people in this scenario.

Willie has it about right. A substantial subset of my players want "kick in the door, fight the orcs" murder hobo style play, some seem not to know how to do anything else but seem to be becoming disillusioned with that play style, and a couple want more actual role-play.

I want a more roleplay centric game with more nuanced combat that just charge and punch it in the face.

I am running games at our local public library for a drop in group of anywhere from 3 to 13+ mostly teens. Yesterday they actually ran away from a fight they though was going to be too tough.Or at least they tried to run away, they are getting pursued. I also heard a couple of tem express a desire to not just murder hobo everything. Gives me hope.  Saddly some of our more role-play and tactically adept players have missed the last few sessions.

Wait... you said you talk to them, repeatedly, and they don't listen. So that means you said, "Hey guys, I'm running things with more logical tactics besides 'kick in the door and attack orcs', (or more to the point, 'run blindly forward and die horribly')." And so they smile and nod and their next A-game play is charging headlong into machineguns for a half mile.

That leaves two sane choices about what they are doing. That is either their A-game (obvious incompetence), or they don't give a shit about what you said. There's no mismatch here, you're hunting for excuses for them and you're not being honest with yourself. You cannot have a talk -- repeatedly -- and get such a consistent mismatch of play expectations.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Quit joshing us here. What's really going on and why do you let this obvious nonsense slide? Are they special needs adults (teens)? I just don't buy this perfect helpless scenario.

edit: Wait! I think I might be too old to remember what it was like to be a teenager... Are you sure this is their A-game and they are s-l-o-w-l-y improving? Because you're making me sad for the future, man.

I much prefer games in which actual play decisions matter, not which widgets you chose at last level up. This preference comes from a desire to simply play a game not spend an inordinate amount of time building and selecting the playing piece.

I enjoy quick and random character generation. During play, particularly at the lowest levels, shit tends to happen and life expectancy isn't the best. I would rather be able to re-roll and get back in the game in about 10 minutes then have to labor over the construction of another complex machine.

Of course these complex characters lead to game design decisions that involve making them nearly death proof so as not to piss off players who put so much effort into them. Once you feel the need to file down the sharp edges on the consequences of failure just to placate the build snowflakes, the integrity of game play is shot to hell and the "game" becomes hardly worth playing.

So, while tinkering with builds can be kind of fun as its own exercise, if the practice drives the game to compromise on the "game" aspect of play, it isn't worth it.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;990504Within the boundaries of one witnesses' (Gronan's) recollection (and that that editor's correction is correct), we know where it came from. "The bit about edged weapons was from Gary's reading the old stories about Archbishop Turpin [ed: later clarified to be Bishop Odo], who wielded a mace because he didn't want to shed blood ("who lives by the sword dies by the sword")."

I've heard that bit about orders too, but no one ever seems to have a reference to what they are talking about. I wonder if it is just everyone else retelling each other's half remembered reference to Odo.

Odo and William both carried those war clubs as symbols of rank and legal authority. Both proved quite adept at shedding blood.

Quote from: Vargold;990692My only problem with ear seekers was that they just led to Standard Door Opening Procedure #2 (now with glass).

That's funny because one of the players in my very first group did the exact same thing after seeing Archie Bunker do it on TV. Our DM figured out where he got the idea and had an orc deal with the eavesdropper the same way Meathead did in that episode: By pounding the door on the other side -stunning the guy with the listening glass.

Quote from: Vargold;990474Dude, Bishop Odo and Van Helsing totally had a baby together.

Except Van Helsing wasn't a clergyman. His garlic, crosses, holy water/wafers and circles of protection worked for others as well as for the Doctor.

Quote from: cranebump;989799Hard to "build" something that has no feats, skills, prestige classes, class dipping and other such widgets. I can't remember a time I planned out my Fighter build in B/X ("and when I reach level 6, I'm gonna...roll for more HP's...")

Not hard at all. Dual-classed characters usually do this, as does the 1E bard: They try to switch at just the right time to max out abilities while speeding advancement.

Quote from: Elfdart;992359Odo and William both carried those war clubs as symbols of rank and legal authority. Both proved quite adept at shedding blood.

That's still where it came from. Whether it was accurate or true or even believed at the time or later (and honestly, who believes that someone getting their head caved in with a friggin' mace won't bleed?), that's where it came from.

QuoteThat's funny because one of the players in my very first group did the exact same thing after seeing Archie Bunker do it on TV. Our DM figured out where he got the idea and had an orc deal with the eavesdropper the same way Meathead did in that episode: By pounding the door on the other side -stunning the guy with the listening glass.

2e Complete Thieves' guide just had ear horns or whatever with a wire mesh. Standard Door Opening Procedure #2 indeed.

QuoteExcept Van Helsing wasn't a clergyman. His garlic, crosses, holy water/wafers and circles of protection worked for others as well as for the Doctor.

I'm really not sure what your point is...?