Don't play with bad players unless your mom is making you play with your younger brother. But.1. Talk to the bad player and try to work it out. If 1 does not work, don't play with them. New players just give them time to look things up in the PHB. Set a 3 minute rule on rule discussions. And let them make mistakes.
The difficult playesr are the worst kind of rules lawyer ( they think they always have to argue with the DM because they have to make quick rulings to keep the game moving) and a disruptive player who is constantly doing everything but DnD, and the new players are just struggling in general as this is the first time they've ever played.
The difficult playesr are the worst kind of rules lawyer ( they think they always have to argue with the DM because they have to make quick rulings to keep the game moving) and a disruptive player who is constantly doing everything but DnD, and the new players are just struggling in general as this is the first time they've ever played.
Well, for the rules lawyer, you can always tell them that if they don’t like your DMing they are free to try their hand at it. Sometimes they do and a new DM gets their wings. Usually they just settle down.
For the new players, just make sure that they know their characters and you know how to answer their questions for them when they come up and sooner or later they won’t be new anymore.
For yourself, re-read chapters 7, 9, and 10 of the PHB. The vast majority of rules that come up every session are in those three chapters. If you know those three chapters well enough, you will be able to better help the new players, and preclude or shut down the rules lawyer most of the time.
Also, once your new players get confident with their own characters, you might suggest that they also read those three chapters. Wait, like I said, let them get the hang of things and feel more confident first. But after that, if everyone at the table is mostly familiar with those three chapters, the new folks will have fewer questions and the rules lawyers will have fewer reasons to lawyer rules. Makes the whole game go quicker.
One last tip, after you have reread those three essential chapters, then learn the rules lawyer’s PCs better than they do. Learn them so hard they when they “correct you” you can say “well, actually it says ‘blahblahblah’ as you can clearly read here on your character sheet....” Once they realize that there is nothing they know that you don’t, they usually stop being quite as “problematic.”
The difficult playesr are the worst kind of rules lawyer ( they think they always have to argue with the DM because they have to make quick rulings to keep the game moving) and a disruptive player who is constantly doing everything but DnD, and the new players are just struggling in general as this is the first time they've ever played.
Well, for the rules lawyer, you can always tell them that if they don’t like your DMing they are free to try their hand at it. Sometimes they do and a new DM gets their wings. Usually they just settle down.
For the new players, just make sure that they know their characters and you know how to answer their questions for them when they come up and sooner or later they won’t be new anymore.
For yourself, re-read chapters 7, 9, and 10 of the PHB. The vast majority of rules that come up every session are in those three chapters. If you know those three chapters well enough, you will be able to better help the new players, and preclude or shut down the rules lawyer most of the time.
Also, once your new players get confident with their own characters, you might suggest that they also read those three chapters. Wait, like I said, let them get the hang of things and feel more confident first. But after that, if everyone at the table is mostly familiar with those three chapters, the new folks will have fewer questions and the rules lawyers will have fewer reasons to lawyer rules. Makes the whole game go quicker.
One last tip, after you have reread those three essential chapters, then learn the rules lawyer’s PCs better than they do. Learn them so hard they when they “correct you” you can say “well, actually it says ‘blahblahblah’ as you can clearly read here on your character sheet....” Once they realize that there is nothing they know that you don’t, they usually stop being quite as “problematic.”
I hope that helps.
That’s really good advice. If a player refuses to focus on the game I gently remind them to pay attention a couple times, then if they refuse to listen I kick them out. There’s a pretty good chance they really don’t wanna be there in the first place. But that’s only ever happened like once.
Unpopular opinion: If the rules lawyers actually know the rules, it’s not the worst idea to listen to them or tell them to wait until after the session is over so it is not disruptive to the game. Good way to learn.
“Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist”.
If you have a group of a Rules Lawyer, an Uninterested veteran and new players you are definitely fighting an uphill struggle.
Start by removing the disruptive player. Games are optional and if they are not willing to focus, they can be there and watch. No point wasting energy until they appreciate the effort the DM puts in.
Next, consider asking the Rules Lawyer every time you have to make a ruling. Once their opinion is given, consider if it will be positive, or negative to the game to use it. If negative (for example you disagree with it) explain that you're going to go in another direction and thank them for their input. If they bring anything up after your ruling just explain that you considered their approach and went in another direction (but don't explain further.) They will eventually pick one of two directions and 1) work with you, accepting when you disagree on rules or 2) Leave the game in disgust. If they choose 2 you are better off without them in your game.
Finally, when dealing with new players you need to know their characters. When you see them failing in an area, such as memorizing spells, walk them through the process when it next occurs in detail. Then next time, reduce the detail until they understand. So using spells as an example:
First morning: Explain how many spells they can memorize per day, explain how they want a heal if possible and a mix of offensive, defensive and support spells. Explain how this occurs each morning.
Second morning: Ask if they have picked the right number of spells.
Third morning: Check they have done their spells.
Fourth onwards: They should be good to go. If they forget, allow them 1 minute to do it.
Each step might last longer than one day depending but ultimately explain a lot then gradually explain less each time. But explaining once often leads to them hiding away and ignoring it as 'too complicated'.
If you have a group of a Rules Lawyer, an Uninterested veteran and new players you are definitely fighting an uphill struggle.
Start by removing the disruptive player. Games are optional and if they are not willing to focus, they can be there and watch. No point wasting energy until they appreciate the effort the DM puts in.
Next, consider asking the Rules Lawyer every time you have to make a ruling. Once their opinion is given, consider if it will be positive, or negative to the game to use it. If negative (for example you disagree with it) explain that you're going to go in another direction and thank them for their input. If they bring anything up after your ruling just explain that you considered their approach and went in another direction (but don't explain further.) They will eventually pick one of two directions and 1) work with you, accepting when you disagree on rules or 2) Leave the game in disgust. If they choose 2 you are better off without them in your game.
Finally, when dealing with new players you need to know their characters. When you see them failing in an area, such as memorizing spells, walk them through the process when it next occurs in detail. Then next time, reduce the detail until they understand. So using spells as an example:
First morning: Explain how many spells they can memorize per day, explain how they want a heal if possible and a mix of offensive, defensive and support spells. Explain how this occurs each morning.
Second morning: Ask if they have picked the right number of spells.
Third morning: Check they have done their spells.
Fourth onwards: They should be good to go. If they forget, allow them 1 minute to do it.
Each step might last longer than one day depending but ultimately explain a lot then gradually explain less each time. But explaining once often leads to them hiding away and ignoring it as 'too complicated'.
Unpopular opinion: If the rules lawyers actually know the rules, it’s not the worst idea to listen to them or tell them to wait until after the session is over so it is not disruptive to the game. Good way to learn.
Learning how the rules are intended to be used is great. But a rules lawyer who is disrupting the session is not acceptable. Additionally, if the rules lawyer is undermining the DM's authority, that is never going to end well. When the DM makes a ruling during a session, that needs to be the end of it. And no, I am not saying the DM is always right in the rules interpretation, but I am saying that the session needs to move forward. The ruling needs to be accepted for the nonce, and if necessary can be returned to out of game for further review.
I would suggest to the OP... how about have a mechanism for this. Tell the rules lawyer that, if they think the DM has ruled incorrectly, to jot that down and simply state, "DM, I would like to flag this ruling for further review." The further review is not going to happen now -- it will happen in between sessions. If the player does it incessantly, do it like pro football and allow a certain number of them -- "You can flag up to 3 rulings per session that you would like me to review in between sessions." This lets the DM learn the rules from the rules lawyer without disrupting sessions. But I would also make a house rule: Any time a session is disrupted but rules arguing, the ruling shall stand, and shall not be reviewed. In other words, the lawyer can either (1) argue, and automatically lose, or (2) flag it for later discussion and possibly win later.
Most rules lawyers will pick (2) and leave you alone during the session after that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Unpopular opinion: If the rules lawyers actually know the rules, it’s not the worst idea to listen to them or tell them to wait until after the session is over so it is not disruptive to the game. Good way to learn.
Learning how the rules are intended to be used is great. But a rules lawyer who is disrupting the session is not acceptable. Additionally, if the rules lawyer is undermining the DM's authority, that is never going to end well. When the DM makes a ruling during a session, that needs to be the end of it. And no, I am not saying the DM is always right in the rules interpretation, but I am saying that the session needs to move forward. The ruling needs to be accepted for the nonce, and if necessary can be returned to out of game for further review.
I would suggest to the OP... how about have a mechanism for this. Tell the rules lawyer that, if they think the DM has ruled incorrectly, to jot that down and simply state, "DM, I would like to flag this ruling for further review." The further review is not going to happen now -- it will happen in between sessions. If the player does it incessantly, do it like pro football and allow a certain number of them -- "You can flag up to 3 rulings per session that you would like me to review in between sessions." This lets the DM learn the rules from the rules lawyer without disrupting sessions. But I would also make a house rule: Any time a session is disrupted but rules arguing, the ruling shall stand, and shall not be reviewed. In other words, the lawyer can either (1) argue, and automatically lose, or (2) flag it for later discussion and possibly win later.
Most rules lawyers will pick (2) and leave you alone during the session after that.
If you have a group of a Rules Lawyer, an Uninterested veteran and new players you are definitely fighting an uphill struggle.
Start by removing the disruptive player. Games are optional and if they are not willing to focus, they can be there and watch. No point wasting energy until they appreciate the effort the DM puts in.
Next, consider asking the Rules Lawyer every time you have to make a ruling. Once their opinion is given, consider if it will be positive, or negative to the game to use it. If negative (for example you disagree with it) explain that you're going to go in another direction and thank them for their input. If they bring anything up after your ruling just explain that you considered their approach and went in another direction (but don't explain further.) They will eventually pick one of two directions and 1) work with you, accepting when you disagree on rules or 2) Leave the game in disgust. If they choose 2 you are better off without them in your game.
Finally, when dealing with new players you need to know their characters. When you see them failing in an area, such as memorizing spells, walk them through the process when it next occurs in detail. Then next time, reduce the detail until they understand. So using spells as an example:
First morning: Explain how many spells they can memorize per day, explain how they want a heal if possible and a mix of offensive, defensive and support spells. Explain how this occurs each morning.
Second morning: Ask if they have picked the right number of spells.
Third morning: Check they have done their spells.
Fourth onwards: They should be good to go. If they forget, allow them 1 minute to do it.
Each step might last longer than one day depending but ultimately explain a lot then gradually explain less each time. But explaining once often leads to them hiding away and ignoring it as 'too complicated'.
I actually try to get two (at least) rules lawyers at a game. And I give them that job. When a question comes up I get one of them to look it up while I continue with the game. That way you get quick resolutions. And the other lawyers don't try anything on since they know they'll get called out.
I actually try to get two (at least) rules lawyers at a game. And I give them that job. When a question comes up I get one of them to look it up while I continue with the game. That way you get quick resolutions. And the other lawyers don't try anything on since they know they'll get called out.
The problem is that this rules lawyer isn't only a rules lawyer, he thinks he's the DM and also is the person who tells people that something they do "isn't what they're character would do" even if he constantly does exactly the opposite of what his character would do.
The problem is that this rules lawyer isn't only a rules lawyer, he thinks he's the DM and also is the person who tells people that something they do "isn't what they're character would do" even if he constantly does exactly the opposite of what his character would do.
That's not a rules lawyer. It's a wangrod. He needs to be stopped immediately. He needs to be shut down when he tells someone what to do. He's also a metagamer, it sounds like, if he is doing the opposite of what his character would do (so he's making the decision of what is optimal in the rules, rather than RPing, even if it's something his character would not know about).
Again, this needs to be stopped at once. He is going to destroy your game group. The other players are going to get sick of his nonsense and realize that no D&D is better than bad D&D, and quit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
The problem is that this rules lawyer isn't only a rules lawyer, he thinks he's the DM and also is the person who tells people that something they do "isn't what they're character would do" even if he constantly does exactly the opposite of what his character would do.
That's not a rules lawyer. It's a wangrod. He needs to be stopped immediately. He needs to be shut down when he tells someone what to do. He's also a metagamer, it sounds like, if he is doing the opposite of what his character would do (so he's making the decision of what is optimal in the rules, rather than RPing, even if it's something his character would not know about).
Again, this needs to be stopped at once. He is going to destroy your game group. The other players are going to get sick of his nonsense and realize that no D&D is better than bad D&D, and quit.
Fair point, thanks for the advice.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mystic
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The title says it all.
Mystic
Not quite. In what ways are the “difficult players” being difficult, and what are the new players struggling with?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Don't play with bad players unless your mom is making you play with your younger brother. But.1. Talk to the bad player and try to work it out. If 1 does not work, don't play with them. New players just give them time to look things up in the PHB. Set a 3 minute rule on rule discussions. And let them make mistakes.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
The difficult playesr are the worst kind of rules lawyer ( they think they always have to argue with the DM because they have to make quick rulings to keep the game moving) and a disruptive player who is constantly doing everything but DnD, and the new players are just struggling in general as this is the first time they've ever played.
Mystic
Well, for the rules lawyer, you can always tell them that if they don’t like your DMing they are free to try their hand at it. Sometimes they do and a new DM gets their wings. Usually they just settle down.
For the new players, just make sure that they know their characters and you know how to answer their questions for them when they come up and sooner or later they won’t be new anymore.
For yourself, re-read chapters 7, 9, and 10 of the PHB. The vast majority of rules that come up every session are in those three chapters. If you know those three chapters well enough, you will be able to better help the new players, and preclude or shut down the rules lawyer most of the time.
Also, once your new players get confident with their own characters, you might suggest that they also read those three chapters. Wait, like I said, let them get the hang of things and feel more confident first. But after that, if everyone at the table is mostly familiar with those three chapters, the new folks will have fewer questions and the rules lawyers will have fewer reasons to lawyer rules. Makes the whole game go quicker.
One last tip, after you have reread those three essential chapters, then learn the rules lawyer’s PCs better than they do. Learn them so hard they when they “correct you” you can say “well, actually it says ‘blahblahblah’ as you can clearly read here on your character sheet....” Once they realize that there is nothing they know that you don’t, they usually stop being quite as “problematic.”
I hope that helps.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That’s really good advice. If a player refuses to focus on the game I gently remind them to pay attention a couple times, then if they refuse to listen I kick them out. There’s a pretty good chance they really don’t wanna be there in the first place. But that’s only ever happened like once.
Also, you'll want to watch the Running the Game series by Matt Colville. First episode starts here:
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
^^^That is very excellent advice.^^^
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
thanks for the reply everyone, I'll try your strategies out and see if they work.
Mystic
Unpopular opinion: If the rules lawyers actually know the rules, it’s not the worst idea to listen to them or tell them to wait until after the session is over so it is not disruptive to the game. Good way to learn.
“Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist”.
I agree with you Cozmo, but not if they constantly do it. Mostly I either completely ignore them until after the session or listen to them.
Mystic
If you have a group of a Rules Lawyer, an Uninterested veteran and new players you are definitely fighting an uphill struggle.
Start by removing the disruptive player. Games are optional and if they are not willing to focus, they can be there and watch. No point wasting energy until they appreciate the effort the DM puts in.
Next, consider asking the Rules Lawyer every time you have to make a ruling. Once their opinion is given, consider if it will be positive, or negative to the game to use it. If negative (for example you disagree with it) explain that you're going to go in another direction and thank them for their input. If they bring anything up after your ruling just explain that you considered their approach and went in another direction (but don't explain further.) They will eventually pick one of two directions and 1) work with you, accepting when you disagree on rules or 2) Leave the game in disgust. If they choose 2 you are better off without them in your game.
Finally, when dealing with new players you need to know their characters. When you see them failing in an area, such as memorizing spells, walk them through the process when it next occurs in detail. Then next time, reduce the detail until they understand. So using spells as an example:
First morning: Explain how many spells they can memorize per day, explain how they want a heal if possible and a mix of offensive, defensive and support spells. Explain how this occurs each morning.
Second morning: Ask if they have picked the right number of spells.
Third morning: Check they have done their spells.
Fourth onwards: They should be good to go. If they forget, allow them 1 minute to do it.
Each step might last longer than one day depending but ultimately explain a lot then gradually explain less each time. But explaining once often leads to them hiding away and ignoring it as 'too complicated'.
Off topic, but love your profile pic.
Learning how the rules are intended to be used is great. But a rules lawyer who is disrupting the session is not acceptable. Additionally, if the rules lawyer is undermining the DM's authority, that is never going to end well. When the DM makes a ruling during a session, that needs to be the end of it. And no, I am not saying the DM is always right in the rules interpretation, but I am saying that the session needs to move forward. The ruling needs to be accepted for the nonce, and if necessary can be returned to out of game for further review.
I would suggest to the OP... how about have a mechanism for this. Tell the rules lawyer that, if they think the DM has ruled incorrectly, to jot that down and simply state, "DM, I would like to flag this ruling for further review." The further review is not going to happen now -- it will happen in between sessions. If the player does it incessantly, do it like pro football and allow a certain number of them -- "You can flag up to 3 rulings per session that you would like me to review in between sessions." This lets the DM learn the rules from the rules lawyer without disrupting sessions. But I would also make a house rule: Any time a session is disrupted but rules arguing, the ruling shall stand, and shall not be reviewed. In other words, the lawyer can either (1) argue, and automatically lose, or (2) flag it for later discussion and possibly win later.
Most rules lawyers will pick (2) and leave you alone during the session after that.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Good idea
Thanks for the advice sarella
Mystic
I actually try to get two (at least) rules lawyers at a game. And I give them that job. When a question comes up I get one of them to look it up while I continue with the game. That way you get quick resolutions. And the other lawyers don't try anything on since they know they'll get called out.
The problem is that this rules lawyer isn't only a rules lawyer, he thinks he's the DM and also is the person who tells people that something they do "isn't what they're character would do" even if he constantly does exactly the opposite of what his character would do.
Mystic
That's not a rules lawyer. It's a wangrod. He needs to be stopped immediately. He needs to be shut down when he tells someone what to do. He's also a metagamer, it sounds like, if he is doing the opposite of what his character would do (so he's making the decision of what is optimal in the rules, rather than RPing, even if it's something his character would not know about).
Again, this needs to be stopped at once. He is going to destroy your game group. The other players are going to get sick of his nonsense and realize that no D&D is better than bad D&D, and quit.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Fair point, thanks for the advice.
Mystic