Effectively, "Calvinball" is a game where there are no rules. And not in the "you're free to do whatever you can think of and the DM will resolve it with a streamlined resolution system" meaning of no rules. In the "I attack the dragon with my mayonnaise pistol and splatter its innards across the forest because it has a deathly violent allergic reaction to mayonnaise" meaning of no rules - even though the party was in town, there WAS no dragon, and nobody has ever invented a mayonnaise pistol.
Calvinball says that whatever most recently came out of a player's mouth is now The Rules, without regard for anything that came before, up until the next player says something else and that becomes the new rules. It's Animaniacs, but with even less structure than Animaniacs.
It is, to put it mildly, not good. Some people love it, but a larger percentage of people end up invincibly confused and wondering what the absolute Shatnerquake tapioca manhell is going on.
Ah. Eww. Ohh. Eww. Thank you but no thank you. I appreciate you breakin’ it down for me.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: You should be able to find players that don't cheat. I've played for absolute ages (35+ years), and only really met one guy who fudged his dice rolls on a regular basis. I'm positive I'm not just lucky.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Why not just let them change it? Let it go! They kill the dragon in one crit because they added a vorpal sword, let it happen. If they have fun who cares? If there is contention in the group over it, take a vote and let the group prevail. If the group says no and someone does it take a vote right then and there to kick the player. The idea is to have fun, and if you clench too tightly on rules you're missing the point. Turn it into a game of Calvin Ball. If you can't handle it, no matter if you are the DM or a player, leave. Open your mind to new ways to play.
This is an interesting take and not necessarily an incorrect one. But it does seem to overlook that the OP has stated they don't want this kind of 'calvinball' style of play and has communicated this to their players. The issue isn't what style of play the OP should engage in, it's the fact that the players have been told not to do something and are disregarding it. I feel this speaks to a lack of respect for social contract of the game.
I wouldn't say the DM is "missing the point" because it's perfectly valid that for the DM, calvinball style play isn't fun and therefore leaning into that would be contrary to the objective of D&D. If they're having fun at the expense of the DM then at least the DM would care, and in theory so should the players.
I also don't think vote-taking is an appropriate solution; the players signed up for the DMs game and agreed to the parameters of it. They don't get to renege on that by power of numbers and beat the DM into accepting a new style of play.
Overall I don't see anything wrong with calvinball play other than forcing people to engage with it when they didn't sign up for that. And to be honest, if you want a calvinball style experience, why even pick up a game with rules?
Why not just let them change it? Let it go! They kill the dragon in one crit because they added a vorpal sword, let it happen. If they have fun who cares? If there is contention in the group over it, take a vote and let the group prevail. If the group says no and someone does it take a vote right then and there to kick the player. The idea is to have fun, and if you clench too tightly on rules you're missing the point. Turn it into a game of Calvin Ball. If you can't handle it, no matter if you are the DM or a player, leave. Open your mind to new ways to play.
Interesting. Do you play many games that way? Like, if it were poker, or monopoly, or say scrabble?
If my hand was a royal straight flumpajim, or I decided that I only accepted my new, selfinvented crypto currency, or threw down the word flumpajim, would that be fine with you?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Why not just let them change it? Let it go! They kill the dragon in one crit because they added a vorpal sword, let it happen. If they have fun who cares? If there is contention in the group over it, take a vote and let the group prevail. If the group says no and someone does it take a vote right then and there to kick the player. The idea is to have fun, and if you clench too tightly on rules you're missing the point. Turn it into a game of Calvin Ball. If you can't handle it, no matter if you are the DM or a player, leave. Open your mind to new ways to play.
This is an interesting take and not necessarily an incorrect one. But it does seem to overlook that the OP has stated they don't want this kind of 'calvinball' style of play and has communicated this to their players. The issue isn't what style of play the OP should engage in, it's the fact that the players have been told not to do something and are disregarding it. I feel this speaks to a lack of respect for social contract of the game.
I wouldn't say the DM is "missing the point" because it's perfectly valid that for the DM, calvinball style play isn't fun and therefore leaning into that would be contrary to the objective of D&D. If they're having fun at the expense of the DM then at least the DM would care, and in theory so should the players.
I also don't think vote-taking is an appropriate solution; the players signed up for the DMs game and agreed to the parameters of it. They don't get to renege on that by power of numbers and beat the DM into accepting a new style of play.
Overall I don't see anything wrong with calvinball play other than forcing people to engage with it when they didn't sign up for that. And to be honest, if you want a calvinball style experience, why even pick up a game with rules?
Agreed, calvinball is the exact opposite of games with rules, which means it doesn't go very well with them. From what I know about it (which isn't very much so feel free to correct me) D&D and games of calvinball are completely different. Unless OP wants to suddenly go out on a limb and completely change the game, then I doubt it would work.
Also, even if OP was still DM and had the power to start a vote, most players would probably vote against it, since they signed up for D&D, and my bet is that they keep buffing up their characters so they can feel the satisfaction of beating challenges, while calvinball probably won't have nearly as many real and hard challenges like that. If this is one thing they like about the game, then they'll probably be opposed to calvinball.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: You should be able to find players that don't cheat. I've played for absolute ages (35+ years), and only really met one guy who fudged his dice rolls on a regular basis. I'm positive I'm not just lucky.
Agreed, I've played for a lot less time than that, but I've played with many different groups and rarely find people who cheat.
I think that people can still leave a group and maintain an amicable relationship with the people who were in it, so I guess, here's my advice to OP: Just leave the group, and find another. If you're worried about finding another, then just another one before you fully quit the other one, and then leave once you make sure you have a place in the second group.
It's hard to judge a group you don't know, but I was leaning into the 'crazy', so to speak. It's a technique that might work, might not. I don't think any game that degrades to Calvin Ball level would last long, nor would I personally want to partake in such a game, but then that's me overlaying my preferred play style and experience onto your situation because I don't know your players.
In the end, it's easiest to leave. You may find that your absence brings some sense of duty to the existing players who may get on the straight and narrow to have you back. If not, well, you don't have to endure the frustration of it anymore. I mean, the game is supposed to be fun for you too :)
Why not just let them change it? Let it go! They kill the dragon in one crit because they added a vorpal sword, let it happen. If they have fun who cares? If there is contention in the group over it, take a vote and let the group prevail. If the group says no and someone does it take a vote right then and there to kick the player. The idea is to have fun, and if you clench too tightly on rules you're missing the point. Turn it into a game of Calvin Ball. If you can't handle it, no matter if you are the DM or a player, leave. Open your mind to new ways to play.
Interesting. Do you play many games that way? Like, if it were poker, or monopoly, or say scrabble?
If my hand was a royal straight flumpajim, or I decided that I only accepted my new, selfinvented crypto currency, or threw down the word flumpajim, would that be fine with you?
Probably not long term campaigns but for one shots I could see it. Instead of playing regular chess your playing suicide chess.
Playing outside the rules 'box' can give insights that you never would have had, could lead to a great idea for a magic item, or a house rule, etc...
Sounds like your players want to play a different game than you're running. If your players feel they need to change their stats to have fun it's likely a balancing issue. Maybe your character to world power levels are off. The best solution I've found in these situations is to use storytelling to bump up their stats and then balance the world through role-playing and world building changes. That way they aren't one-shotting everything nor feeling like they're constantly losing or missing out on something.
Alternatively, make them submit pdfs of their sheets at the end of each session so you can check them easily at the start of the next session. It's a digital version of the DM collecting sheets at the end of the session to hold until next time.
Hm. You know, I hadn't thought of it as Calvinball Chicken. Showing the players what happens when the DM disregards the rules of the game as thoroughly as they have may not solve anything - you can't fix above-table problems with in-game antics - but boy would it be cathartic.
"Okay, let's do this. Roll a moose check."
"Huh? What's a moose check...?"
"It's a check to see if a rabid moose jumps out of the ground next to you and starts dropkicking you. Roll it"
" Umm, okay...I rolled a 12... what do I add to-"
"No no, you don't roll moose checks with dice. For a moose check you get up off the couch and start rolling down the hall. I watch, and decide if you rolled well enough to avoid the moose. Up and tumbling, Jerry."
Enough of that and you won't have a game anymore, of course. But man. I have to admit, the idea of "leaning into it" not to try and save the game but instead to demonstrate to the players why they absolutely do not want to play that way is a notion with more spice than I thought it'd have.
"No no, you don't roll moose checks with dice. For a moose check you get up off the couch and start rolling down the hall. I watch, and decide if you rolled well enough to avoid the moose. Up and tumbling, Jerry."
Enough of that and you won't have a game anymore, of course. But man. I have to admit, the idea of "leaning into it" not to try and save the game but instead to demonstrate to the players why they absolutely do not want to play that way is a notion with more spice than I thought it'd have.
That's sound pretty high-risk of turning into a real fight. Like, I wouldn't escalate calvin ball to real physicality, at least unless I knew everyone had larping experience and we were sticking to larp safety rules.
But your point stands. Calvinball goes both/all ways, of course the DM can pull crazy bullshit on the players at the same time.
Holy cow that's a lot of responses.... Unexpected.
To reiterate: I'm no longer running a game, I brought it to a conclusion significantly earlier than I would've liked and we've started a new game with a different person being DM. That said, this behavior is still happening, and they're doing it primarily because their dice roll crappy all the time and they keep missing an attack by just 1 or 2, or they feel a need for an extra d6 of damage from a dagger or on a cantrip when the character hasn't yet earned it, or changing things they selected when they leveled up because they don't like how it works or isn't as cool as they'd thought it would be, and other junk like that to similar effect. It seems to me they just don't grasp the concepts of having limitations and showing growth that come with character and story development.
Also, again, one of the players at issue is my wife. I can't exactly just walk away from that (nor do I want to). The other problem players are folks I've known just a few years now.
The rest of players are friends that I've had for 30+ years, and we've been playing a variety of TTRPG's for almost 30 years. They see this behavior as a problem same as I do, the only difference is that I just stopped arguing about it.
As for the possible changes I suggested to D&DB, well, folks are blowing out of proportion. I never suggested that a DM simply take or steal a character from a player or anything of that sort. I suggested a mechanism be put in place for the DM to see and approve of changes to a players sheet. Sure things like spells and stuff can change nearly anytime so the do not need to be tracked. But ability scores, weapon damage? Those things should rarely if ever get modified with the exception of Ability Score Improvement when leveling up.
Folks were suggesting printing out the sheets and making them play off the paper. Sure, could work, but there is also nothing stopping them from changing stuff on the paper either. Some suggested just letting it go and run the game haphazard and loosely. Sure, could do that, but that isn't a game I want to play in either. They may call it "Calvinball" now, but in my day they referred to that as "Monty Hall" where anything goes because someone just decides it does. It usually referred to DM's/GM's that just did what they wanted and to hell with the rules that the rest of us play by, but it sometimes catches players too, as in this instance.
Sure I could attempt to find another group, and likely take my old friends with me, which would effectively kill the existing group, and I would be the cause of it. Meaning I would get no-end of an earful from my wife about it, and that would likely last for several months. I don't need that either. That's part of why I brought my game to a conclusion and ended it. The new DM is/was one of the problem players, and after our most recent game he stayed after a bit and commented to me that he sees now why I kept bringing it up and telling people to knock it off. It makes it seriously difficult to plan encounters and larger story lines when people just do what they want. So at least I eventually got through to one of them, and he sees it now and appreciates the problem this behavior causes. I'm just waiting for him to ask me what to do when he starts getting angry about it.
Until then, the rest of us still try to enjoy the game and just put up with the shenanigans and BS the others are pulling. Those of us who agree with me have talked and decided that we'll keep playing by the rules until it just isn't fun anymore, and then they'll just stop coming to the game. It'll then eventually just die off, and no single person would be to blame for it. And then maybe next year we can get together again, minus a couple people, and start anew assuming we still have a desire to play at all.
"No no, you don't roll moose checks with dice. For a moose check you get up off the couch and start rolling down the hall. I watch, and decide if you rolled well enough to avoid the moose. Up and tumbling, Jerry."
That's probably the best thing I've ever read on this forum.
Because games with no rules aren't fun. The whole point of Calvin Ball is that it isn't a game, it is how a little kid who can't deal with losing acts.
Holy cow that's a lot of responses.... Unexpected.
To reiterate: I'm no longer running a game, I brought it to a conclusion significantly earlier than I would've liked and we've started a new game with a different person being DM. That said, this behavior is still happening, and they're doing it primarily because their dice roll crappy all the time and they keep missing an attack by just 1 or 2, or they feel a need for an extra d6 of damage from a dagger or on a cantrip when the character hasn't yet earned it, or changing things they selected when they leveled up because they don't like how it works or isn't as cool as they'd thought it would be, and other junk like that to similar effect. It seems to me they just don't grasp the concepts of having limitations and showing growth that come with character and story development.
Also, again, one of the players at issue is my wife. I can't exactly just walk away from that (nor do I want to). The other problem players are folks I've known just a few years now.
The rest of players are friends that I've had for 30+ years, and we've been playing a variety of TTRPG's for almost 30 years. They see this behavior as a problem same as I do, the only difference is that I just stopped arguing about it.
As for the possible changes I suggested to D&DB, well, folks are blowing out of proportion. I never suggested that a DM simply take or steal a character from a player or anything of that sort. I suggested a mechanism be put in place for the DM to see and approve of changes to a players sheet. Sure things like spells and stuff can change nearly anytime so the do not need to be tracked. But ability scores, weapon damage? Those things should rarely if ever get modified with the exception of Ability Score Improvement when leveling up.
Folks were suggesting printing out the sheets and making them play off the paper. Sure, could work, but there is also nothing stopping them from changing stuff on the paper either. Some suggested just letting it go and run the game haphazard and loosely. Sure, could do that, but that isn't a game I want to play in either. They may call it "Calvinball" now, but in my day they referred to that as "Monty Hall" where anything goes because someone just decides it does. It usually referred to DM's/GM's that just did what they wanted and to hell with the rules that the rest of us play by, but it sometimes catches players too, as in this instance.
Sure I could attempt to find another group, and likely take my old friends with me, which would effectively kill the existing group, and I would be the cause of it. Meaning I would get no-end of an earful from my wife about it, and that would likely last for several months. I don't need that either. That's part of why I brought my game to a conclusion and ended it. The new DM is/was one of the problem players, and after our most recent game he stayed after a bit and commented to me that he sees now why I kept bringing it up and telling people to knock it off. It makes it seriously difficult to plan encounters and larger story lines when people just do what they want. So at least I eventually got through to one of them, and he sees it now and appreciates the problem this behavior causes. I'm just waiting for him to ask me what to do when he starts getting angry about it.
Until then, the rest of us still try to enjoy the game and just put up with the shenanigans and BS the others are pulling. Those of us who agree with me have talked and decided that we'll keep playing by the rules until it just isn't fun anymore, and then they'll just stop coming to the game. It'll then eventually just die off, and no single person would be to blame for it. And then maybe next year we can get together again, minus a couple people, and start anew assuming we still have a desire to play at all.
That sounds like the best possible solution, you could also always leave the group on your own if it becomes to frustrating for you and still remain friends with the other people, though one of the players being your wife would certainly complicate finding another group without them being upset.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Say what now? Dude, if you cannot have a talk to the woman you're married to, and convince her to not tamper with the stats of her character, I .. just .. I dunno man. I mean, I'm going to assume you live together. Maybe get a character sheet in print, then. Sort of as a reminder.
'Woman, you do not have tumble! It's not even in this edition of the game. And here, I can prove it, because I have your sheet!!'
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
If you use beyond20 to roll from your sheet to a VTT then in future as DM just have their character sheet assigned to you (as DM) and make sure it’s public not private and they will be able to roll from the sheet but not make any changes to it
I have been guilty of this occasionally, and as a DM I allow it in limited amounts, but this too much. Solution: give them exhaustion every time they do it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Magic is distilled laziness. Put that on my gravestone.”
If I caught someone doing this without saying anything, they probably wouldn't be in my group for long.
I'm fairly flexible on things like 'can I swap this spell for that one' etc or 'actually can I try out this fighting style or swap subclasses etc.' So long as people are open about it, not requesting things like this ever session, and not just behind the scenes buffing their numbers to get better rolls.
Threads like this keep me from ever taking my group for granted. I hope OP has found or will find a similar-minded group of folks, because no amount of rules or techniques will ever squeeze a good game out of bad players.
Threads like this keep me from ever taking my group for granted. I hope OP has found or will find a similar-minded group of folks, because no amount of rules or techniques will ever squeeze a good game out of bad players.
Yeah. The games I DM have only ever been within a pre existing friend group so I've had mostly only good experiences as a DM. I've joined random games as a player but don't think I'd ever DM for a group where I didn't already know most of the players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ah. Eww. Ohh. Eww. Thank you but no thank you. I appreciate you breakin’ it down for me.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say: You should be able to find players that don't cheat. I've played for absolute ages (35+ years), and only really met one guy who fudged his dice rolls on a regular basis. I'm positive I'm not just lucky.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
This is an interesting take and not necessarily an incorrect one. But it does seem to overlook that the OP has stated they don't want this kind of 'calvinball' style of play and has communicated this to their players. The issue isn't what style of play the OP should engage in, it's the fact that the players have been told not to do something and are disregarding it. I feel this speaks to a lack of respect for social contract of the game.
I wouldn't say the DM is "missing the point" because it's perfectly valid that for the DM, calvinball style play isn't fun and therefore leaning into that would be contrary to the objective of D&D. If they're having fun at the expense of the DM then at least the DM would care, and in theory so should the players.
I also don't think vote-taking is an appropriate solution; the players signed up for the DMs game and agreed to the parameters of it. They don't get to renege on that by power of numbers and beat the DM into accepting a new style of play.
Overall I don't see anything wrong with calvinball play other than forcing people to engage with it when they didn't sign up for that. And to be honest, if you want a calvinball style experience, why even pick up a game with rules?
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Interesting. Do you play many games that way? Like, if it were poker, or monopoly, or say scrabble?
If my hand was a royal straight flumpajim, or I decided that I only accepted my new, selfinvented crypto currency, or threw down the word flumpajim, would that be fine with you?
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Agreed, calvinball is the exact opposite of games with rules, which means it doesn't go very well with them. From what I know about it (which isn't very much so feel free to correct me) D&D and games of calvinball are completely different. Unless OP wants to suddenly go out on a limb and completely change the game, then I doubt it would work.
Also, even if OP was still DM and had the power to start a vote, most players would probably vote against it, since they signed up for D&D, and my bet is that they keep buffing up their characters so they can feel the satisfaction of beating challenges, while calvinball probably won't have nearly as many real and hard challenges like that. If this is one thing they like about the game, then they'll probably be opposed to calvinball.
Agreed, I've played for a lot less time than that, but I've played with many different groups and rarely find people who cheat.
I think that people can still leave a group and maintain an amicable relationship with the people who were in it, so I guess, here's my advice to OP: Just leave the group, and find another. If you're worried about finding another, then just another one before you fully quit the other one, and then leave once you make sure you have a place in the second group.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.It's hard to judge a group you don't know, but I was leaning into the 'crazy', so to speak. It's a technique that might work, might not. I don't think any game that degrades to Calvin Ball level would last long, nor would I personally want to partake in such a game, but then that's me overlaying my preferred play style and experience onto your situation because I don't know your players.
In the end, it's easiest to leave. You may find that your absence brings some sense of duty to the existing players who may get on the straight and narrow to have you back. If not, well, you don't have to endure the frustration of it anymore. I mean, the game is supposed to be fun for you too :)
Probably not long term campaigns but for one shots I could see it. Instead of playing regular chess your playing suicide chess.
Playing outside the rules 'box' can give insights that you never would have had, could lead to a great idea for a magic item, or a house rule, etc...
Sounds like your players want to play a different game than you're running. If your players feel they need to change their stats to have fun it's likely a balancing issue. Maybe your character to world power levels are off. The best solution I've found in these situations is to use storytelling to bump up their stats and then balance the world through role-playing and world building changes. That way they aren't one-shotting everything nor feeling like they're constantly losing or missing out on something.
Alternatively, make them submit pdfs of their sheets at the end of each session so you can check them easily at the start of the next session. It's a digital version of the DM collecting sheets at the end of the session to hold until next time.
Hm. You know, I hadn't thought of it as Calvinball Chicken. Showing the players what happens when the DM disregards the rules of the game as thoroughly as they have may not solve anything - you can't fix above-table problems with in-game antics - but boy would it be cathartic.
"Okay, let's do this. Roll a moose check."
"Huh? What's a moose check...?"
"It's a check to see if a rabid moose jumps out of the ground next to you and starts dropkicking you. Roll it"
" Umm, okay...I rolled a 12... what do I add to-"
"No no, you don't roll moose checks with dice. For a moose check you get up off the couch and start rolling down the hall. I watch, and decide if you rolled well enough to avoid the moose. Up and tumbling, Jerry."
Enough of that and you won't have a game anymore, of course. But man. I have to admit, the idea of "leaning into it" not to try and save the game but instead to demonstrate to the players why they absolutely do not want to play that way is a notion with more spice than I thought it'd have.
Please do not contact or message me.
That's sound pretty high-risk of turning into a real fight. Like, I wouldn't escalate calvin ball to real physicality, at least unless I knew everyone had larping experience and we were sticking to larp safety rules.
But your point stands. Calvinball goes both/all ways, of course the DM can pull crazy bullshit on the players at the same time.
Holy cow that's a lot of responses.... Unexpected.
To reiterate: I'm no longer running a game, I brought it to a conclusion significantly earlier than I would've liked and we've started a new game with a different person being DM. That said, this behavior is still happening, and they're doing it primarily because their dice roll crappy all the time and they keep missing an attack by just 1 or 2, or they feel a need for an extra d6 of damage from a dagger or on a cantrip when the character hasn't yet earned it, or changing things they selected when they leveled up because they don't like how it works or isn't as cool as they'd thought it would be, and other junk like that to similar effect. It seems to me they just don't grasp the concepts of having limitations and showing growth that come with character and story development.
Also, again, one of the players at issue is my wife. I can't exactly just walk away from that (nor do I want to). The other problem players are folks I've known just a few years now.
The rest of players are friends that I've had for 30+ years, and we've been playing a variety of TTRPG's for almost 30 years. They see this behavior as a problem same as I do, the only difference is that I just stopped arguing about it.
As for the possible changes I suggested to D&DB, well, folks are blowing out of proportion. I never suggested that a DM simply take or steal a character from a player or anything of that sort. I suggested a mechanism be put in place for the DM to see and approve of changes to a players sheet. Sure things like spells and stuff can change nearly anytime so the do not need to be tracked. But ability scores, weapon damage? Those things should rarely if ever get modified with the exception of Ability Score Improvement when leveling up.
Folks were suggesting printing out the sheets and making them play off the paper. Sure, could work, but there is also nothing stopping them from changing stuff on the paper either. Some suggested just letting it go and run the game haphazard and loosely. Sure, could do that, but that isn't a game I want to play in either. They may call it "Calvinball" now, but in my day they referred to that as "Monty Hall" where anything goes because someone just decides it does. It usually referred to DM's/GM's that just did what they wanted and to hell with the rules that the rest of us play by, but it sometimes catches players too, as in this instance.
Sure I could attempt to find another group, and likely take my old friends with me, which would effectively kill the existing group, and I would be the cause of it. Meaning I would get no-end of an earful from my wife about it, and that would likely last for several months. I don't need that either. That's part of why I brought my game to a conclusion and ended it. The new DM is/was one of the problem players, and after our most recent game he stayed after a bit and commented to me that he sees now why I kept bringing it up and telling people to knock it off. It makes it seriously difficult to plan encounters and larger story lines when people just do what they want. So at least I eventually got through to one of them, and he sees it now and appreciates the problem this behavior causes. I'm just waiting for him to ask me what to do when he starts getting angry about it.
Until then, the rest of us still try to enjoy the game and just put up with the shenanigans and BS the others are pulling. Those of us who agree with me have talked and decided that we'll keep playing by the rules until it just isn't fun anymore, and then they'll just stop coming to the game. It'll then eventually just die off, and no single person would be to blame for it. And then maybe next year we can get together again, minus a couple people, and start anew assuming we still have a desire to play at all.
That's probably the best thing I've ever read on this forum.
Because games with no rules aren't fun. The whole point of Calvin Ball is that it isn't a game, it is how a little kid who can't deal with losing acts.
That sounds like the best possible solution, you could also always leave the group on your own if it becomes to frustrating for you and still remain friends with the other people, though one of the players being your wife would certainly complicate finding another group without them being upset.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Say what now? Dude, if you cannot have a talk to the woman you're married to, and convince her to not tamper with the stats of her character, I .. just .. I dunno man. I mean, I'm going to assume you live together. Maybe get a character sheet in print, then. Sort of as a reminder.
'Woman, you do not have tumble! It's not even in this edition of the game. And here, I can prove it, because I have your sheet!!'
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
If you use beyond20 to roll from your sheet to a VTT then in future as DM just have their character sheet assigned to you (as DM) and make sure it’s public not private and they will be able to roll from the sheet but not make any changes to it
you can suggest that to the new DM as well
I have been guilty of this occasionally, and as a DM I allow it in limited amounts, but this too much. Solution: give them exhaustion every time they do it.
“Magic is distilled laziness. Put that on my gravestone.”
If I caught someone doing this without saying anything, they probably wouldn't be in my group for long.
I'm fairly flexible on things like 'can I swap this spell for that one' etc or 'actually can I try out this fighting style or swap subclasses etc.' So long as people are open about it, not requesting things like this ever session, and not just behind the scenes buffing their numbers to get better rolls.
Threads like this keep me from ever taking my group for granted. I hope OP has found or will find a similar-minded group of folks, because no amount of rules or techniques will ever squeeze a good game out of bad players.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Yeah. The games I DM have only ever been within a pre existing friend group so I've had mostly only good experiences as a DM. I've joined random games as a player but don't think I'd ever DM for a group where I didn't already know most of the players.