Of all the various players with issues I've run into, the one I have a particular hatred for is the contrarian. For some reason they always show up a lot in groups:
> The one guy who doesn't want to make a character who fits the setting
> The one guy who wants to get along without powers in a setting where everyone has powers
> The one butthole who doesn't actually want to go along with the party on an adventure
What compels people to do this? Is it the need to be special, or just an urge to be an butthole?
The most notable one is always "I want to be a non-magic user in a setting where the players are reasonably expected to have magic", which always seem suicidally self-defeating. That, or "I want to be the one Evil dude in a Good party, I can handle it, I'm responsible, it'd be a great RPG experience"
Just why would you do that, in a social game?
Most people are fricking moronic and don't know what to do when they're put in a situation that remotely resembles having power and agency with minimal consequences. You ever see what happens when you give GTA to some normie homosexual who has never played a game? They're running down pedestrians and shooting cops within minutes.
> You ever see what happens when you give GTA to some normie homosexual who has never played a game? They're running down pedestrians and shooting cops within minutes.
That's just basically everyone, because GTA isn't a social game. It's a 'fricking around' simulator, and the game actively encourages it.
>The one guy who wants to get along without powers in a setting where everyone has powers
You're right, that's very annoying. You want them to have a reason why they're not easily murdered every other session but they refuse it.
It's a crutch to make up for zero personality, see also: Ganker.
tpbp
>What compels people to do this? Is it the need to be special, or just an urge to be an butthole?
yes. Why else even be a PC otherwise? If I'm just gonna be Generic Genericson, then why was I even told to make a PC?
Contrarian character idea or otherwise, the real problem is a lack of communication with the rest of the party and the DM for what their expectations are. I don't know why the butthole rogue who wants to filch something out of another PC's pocket to flesh out his character's RP can't have a conversation with the player and say "hey I want to do this RP scene with your character and want to have your input for what happens and generally how it will be resolved is that OK?" Then they get to be a dickass rogue and the other guy gets to have some input on the party dynamic as well. Instead of being a negative experience for everyone but the rogue it's a positive experience for everyone.
>I want to be a non-magic user in a setting where the players are reasonably expected to have magic
I've never encountered a situation where everyone was required to have magic
> I've never encountered a situation where everyone was required to have magic
It's Mage! It was fricking Mage: The Awakening. EVERYONE was a wizard.
ok, now you got my attention.
What did he want to be, a boxer? A scientist?
Did you explain to him a Mage is just a reality bender and he can manifest his powers as he pleases, so long as he respects the rules of being one?
At least that's what I would have said to get him to understand...
He wanted to be a private detective / bounty hunter. Like Mike Hammer meets Dog the Bounty Hunter, basically.
he was clearly being an butthole then because it's like
>I want to be an action movie detective
Akasha
>I want to be like a special-ops type deal
Euthanatos
>I want to be a self-righteous noir detective
Hollow Ones
he can totally be whatever and still be awakened
did you read the book
yes but tasers and zip cuffs don't work well against Abyssals
its not a taser its a pure prime focus
>the real problem is a lack of communication with the rest of the party and the DM for what their expectations are.
You'd think that, but no. Sometimes you can talk with these people for hours about what the rest of the group wants to play and what the game master has prepared and they still insist on being the one niche thing that isn't easily supported.
>I've never encountered a situation where everyone was required to have magic
Magic may not be the right word, but I need two hands where I've had players expect to be allowed to play as unpowered humans in supers games then get indignant when I had to bend over backwards to asspull reasons why they're not pasted every combat encounter.
>Just why would you do that, in a social game?
There's a massive range of potential reasons. Unless they go against the grain in a way that totally fricks the game, the best thing to do is to let them but require them to either commit to it or character arc into a more appropriate theme.
>I don't know why the butthole rogue who wants to filch something out of another PC's pocket to flesh out his character's RP can't have a conversation with the player and say "hey I want to do this RP scene with your character and want to have your input for what happens and generally how it will be resolved is that OK?"
That assumes they're not a dick. Not a lot you can do to resolve someone being a dick.
>He wanted to be a private detective / bounty hunter. Like Mike Hammer meets Dog the Bounty Hunter, basically.
why didn't he want to this magically?
Honestly, this is frequently true, so long as the player is being reasonable with their questions and plans. It just goes bad a lot when people aren't on the same wavelength and the GM doesn't say "okay hang on I think we're a bit off topic" before he gets out of his depth. If you find yourself improving too much dwarven tax policy when your game doesn't care about it, it's time to stop.
If your game DOES care about dwarven tax policy, you should have had a reasonable amount prepared.
I've never understood why the words "low fantasy setting" instantly makes people want to play a wizard.
Harry Potter is a low fantasy setting. Why wouldn't you be able to play a wizard in a low fantasy setting?
>Low fantasy means fantasy set on Earth!!!!
No one uses this definition anymore, besides braindead contrarians
Because the world is set up to make that person insanely special.
I have conceived of "fantasy worlds" without magic, but no one wants to play them. Sucks.
I love contrarianism frick you
Hah!
>> The one butthole who doesn't actually want to go along with the party on an adventure
This is really the only infuriating one for me because it actively detracts from the game everyone is putting their time aside to be there and participate in. I swear to god there's always one guy who thinks everything is a sandbox game, which he'll then use to derail the entire thing for an hour only to promptly lose all interest.
In my experience that's the only guy engaged
This T B Q H
Need to find a way to channel "that guy's" energy. Can make it more fun for everyone.
just wait until you run into
>my character chooses to jump off the cliff
>"so your character is committing suicide?"
>i didn't say anything about my character doing that
>"but you're jumping off a cliff and you don't have wings"
>THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S SUICIDE
>"alright, let's roll for it..."
what kind of game are you playing where jumping off a cliff isn't a valid mobility tactic?
NTA but if you jump of a 90ft cliff in a game I run without a way of stopping your fall it isn't going to end well for you.
The ground, anon.
The ground will stop my fall.
And it only does 20d6 damage max at terminal velocity. It's not like I'm falling in a vaccuum, there's air.
>when you only hit the ground for 120 damange
feels good to have 121 HP.
One of these days, I'll fake my characters death by jumping off a cliff that you couldn't possibly survive!
this was essentially my gameplan from the moment I could do it.
Playing an un augmented child in cyberpunk 2020 and you can't stop me, nerd.
It depends on what specifically they're being contrarian about. What I mean is that:
>The one guy who wants to get along without powers in a setting where everyone has powers
Is probably due to some desire to be a Batman-like character while
>The one butthole who doesn't actually want to go along with the party on an adventure
Is likely born from an urge to push the limits of the game.
>Is likely born from an urge to push the limits of the game.
Push it for who, tho?
The only one it really affects is the other players.
I don't understand your meaning, so I will elaborate.
I've only encountered this kind of player when they're fresh to tabletop. I think the reason they do this is because they see the relative freedom that a ttrpg presents compared to videogames and realize they don't need to follow the "main quest", so they want to see what happens when they choose to do anything other than what "the game" wants them to do.
I guess it's like opening Skyrim and being permitted to go south into Cyrodiil. They understand it is theoretically possible but they are unable to or don't bother thinking about how the game only works when all the players agree to go along with the campaign the GM has prepared (for the sake of the metaphor, this would mean agreeing to stay in Skyrim).
So maybe "pushing the limits" is a misleading way of putting it, but I hope I'm being more clear.
he sees the adventure as some predefined fun and wants something more freeform
As a GM, you think that the "pushy player" is specificallly trying to make your life harder, but he's really just trying to play the game, i.e he's trying to interact with the GM on the level of imagination. Nobody warns new players not to go off the rails, nor should they, people get excited about TTRPGs because TTRPGs let them do anything.
Experienced and friendly players are constantly "pushing" their GM and forcing him to come up with new stuff, but it's in small ways, to whatever degree that GM is comfortable with or has the most fun with, it's the kind of thing you feel out by playing together a lot. And then you'll hear from the GMs who try to run a sanbox game, and it fails, so they think their players are too stupid to go off the rails. It's all about mutual expectations.
>"I want to be a non-magic user in a setting where the players are reasonably expected to have magic", which always seem suicidally self-defeating
I hope you aren't talking about D&D or anything like it.
> The one guy who doesn't want to make a character who fits the setting
This can be a player problem, but sometimes it's a GM problem, ex. if the GM doesn't understand non-magical fantasy heroes so he makes a big stink over nothing even when the game and setting support non-magical fantasy heroes.
> The one butthole who doesn't actually want to go along with the party on an adventure
Usually a noob or an butthole. He might just be telling you that your hook wasn't good enough, and that you need to pay more attention to his backstory.
I might get into some trouble because of this, because I find myself recreating the same basic moral outlook every time, "This character is ambitious and will do/tolerate evil if it gets him what he wants but he is also somewhat impressionable and will probably bond closely to the first adventurers that he ever adventures with." I'm trying to make a character that always goes on the adventure no matter what, because that's my job as a player, but then I describe my character and everyone thinks I'm trying to play the evil-guy-passing-as-neutral.
That player is sent away, it's very simple anon.
I agree with you that the first and third points are annoying, but I love normal dudes killing shit in very high power settings. It's literally always badass.
I swear to god, I'd make all players DM for at least three sessions. Knowing what goes on behind the GM screen would at least temper so much moronation because players just don't understand the other end.
Have you never seen a novice GM trying to play? Have you never seen them crippled by decision paralysis as they try not to step on your toes? A noob running a game is a tragedy, their job is to learn to be good players, GMing comes much later.
I started by GMing, and I turned out fine.
It is definitely a jump in the deep end, I feel, but maybe you find out after you throw them in the water they can swim?
If all else fails, you just have a more veteran player tag them out or make some "narrative suggestions" to the floundering GM.
They will learn, so long as they have their heart in it.
also a significant amount of people stop being dicks when they experience the table from the other side
those who don't have some other problem that's not yourself to solve
>I swear to god, I'd make all players DM for at least three sessions.
Pretty silly notion that you have to force people to GM, when there are players who want to but have no one to do it with.
its not really about supply and demand, but rather people experiencing first hand what it's like when morons throw a wrench in your plans by momentarily acting like morons even if they don't mean to. dms not just shit out games.
I agree with you that it's good experience, but what I mean is that getting experience as a GM is a luxury.
If you're willing to "make players DM" then kudos to you for charity work
To create novelty in a novelty seeking activity.
If you want to play bland cookie cutter games bereft of imagination just join the sad ranks of the "osr." Most people playing fantasy/sci fi games aren't interested in acting the part of generic mooks. That's your job as the GM.
I dunno man, in most of my experiences related to this I think it might have something to do with some people not being able to read the room or they come in with their own ideas and aren't able to adapt out of sheer social awkwardness, i'll have players come into my games and before I even tell them the setting I get sent full backstories or full sheets. And it sometimes ends with them leaving because 10 - 15% of their stuff had to be rewritten to fit the world. Or worse, when they're just running a build and if you ban/nerf one thing the whole thing falls apart.
Because you’ve all quantified fantasy into so many neat little categories of tropes, cliches, worldbuilding, etc that turbocasuals have forgone trying to simply play the fricking game in favor of trying to outshine what’s “established” in this undesired cultural zeitgeist.
Think about it. In an activity that frequently expects and rewards creativity, how are the newfound hordes of nogaems supposed to “fit in”, despite lacking any creative spark themselves? Contrarianism. Take whatever has been quantified as the “norm” in a given tabletop game, ie setting, and do something in flagrantly stark contrast of it, with the vain hope this will make you stand out. It requires nothing other than 5 minutes browsing t*tropes.
TL;DR It’s a substitute for creativity and a bid for quick internet fame in an escapist medium that has found itself increasingly concerned with posturing and superficial relevancy over simply playing out a fricking adventure module.
But, anon, it was just as bad before the internet. It's just what players do. Players today are slightly more likely to do something superficially quirky (good tiefling teehee) but they're also less likely to flagrantly discard the premise of the game (playing balrogs, or cowboys, or any of the other shit that Gygax allowed).
Going against the grain is obvious conflict. Story-telling is all about conflict in every sense (nobody tells a story about how they accomplished something with no barriers- like 'I got dressed this morning').
It's a cheap way to get conflict, but that conflict remains interesting. It's why we are all so annoyed by Isekai power-fantasies, where a character is handed all kinds of crazy powers with no drawbacks. Any potential for conflict is removed, and so is any interest.
Perhaps a solution would be if you find one of those contrarians, find some other conflict for their character to overcome. But it needs to be one that's blatantly obvious from the getgo.