Hal wrote:On and on and on that would go. The game was more about explaining why you did/didn't die than actually avoiding anything. Usually this game just ended in frustration, because my older cousin had much more patience (and much more creativity) for explaining why he wins and you lose.
Hal wrote:Regarding the actual show topic, I'll end up repeating things that were said in the episode, but when has that ever stopped me from commenting?
I think players who employ Trap Cards come in two kinds. The first would be those who have been trained by a GM who pulls this kind of nonsense. That GM who will find a way to punish you no matter what; Dan talked about dealing with one of these guys in the episode. If you're a fire mage, all of his monsters have fire immunity. If he hears your plans to sneak in the back entrance, suddenly that's where all of the guards are posted. If the monster has an Achilles heel, he's wearing Adamantine boots. Players who deal with GMs like this get used to having to explain in the clearest details what they're doing just so the GM doesn't find a way to screw them over (though this usually doesn't work.)
For this player, it would probably help to get them to trust you. If you fail this roll, the game is not going to end, I'm not going to punish you, and you can still enjoy an interesting game because of it. (We're not playing by Blackleaf rules here.)
The second kind of player is the one who is inherently afraid of failure. For whatever reason, they don't think they can enjoy the game if they don't succeed on every roll, so they're doing this to mitigate any possibility of failure. If they prep enough, they're hoping you don't ask them to roll (or the DC is so low they practically can't fail); if they do botch the roll, the "trap cards" let them avoid any consequences for failure.
In this case, I almost think the better route is to play a different game with this player. D&D 5E was an example given, where you either get Advantage or Disadvantage and that's all there is to it. For a player like this, you might want something rules light, where the game doesn't care if you over-define things or not. (Conversely, maybe it's better to go with a super-crunchy system for them; the system defines things so well that they can't play their Trap Cards because it's not mechanically possible.)
PS Fuck you CafepressJulia wrote:You don't understand the amount of dick I get ... in my giant American Hoohah.
Aisha wrote:I forgot to mention that another good way to sweat the players is fake-checking the rules from a particularly menacing splatbook or chapter.
Azhrei Vep wrote:
I'll add a third type: Someone who legitimately believes they have cooked up a clever and near-perfect plan, and is waaaay too excited to get it all out, right there in the moment. Like the player equivalent of the "shocking GM reveal that nobody actually cares about".
And, uh ... it's more than a little embarassing to look around and realize you just did that.
Users browsing this forum: Gyro LC and 4 guests