Can't say any big surprises here....

Law's Game Style created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Method Actor You think that gaming is a form of creative expression. You may view rules as, at best, a necessary evil, preferring sessions where the dice never come out of the bag. You enjoy situations that test or deepen your character's personality traits. Method Actor 100% Storyteller 83% Specialist 83% Tactician 75% Butt-Kicker 67% Power Gamer 50% Casual Gamer 8%

Quiz Results

Law's Game Style created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Method Actor You think that gaming is a form of creative expression. You may view rules as, at best, a necessary evil, preferring sessions where the dice never come out of the bag. You enjoy situations that test or deepen your character's personality traits. Method Actor 100% Specialist 92% Storyteller 83% Power Gamer 83% Butt-Kicker 75% Tactician 67% Casual Gamer 50%

My Quiz Results

Law's Game Style created with QuizFarm.com

You scored as Method Actor You think that gaming is a form of creative expression. You may view rules as, at best, a necessary evil, preferring sessions where the dice never come out of the bag. You enjoy situations that test or deepen your character's personality traits. Method Actor 75% Butt-Kicker 67% Storyteller 58% Specialist 58% Tactician 58% Power Gamer 50% Casual Gamer 17%

Stupid Advice: Special Player Status?

Stupidranger.com received its very first "letter to the editor" this week (a phenomenon that seems to be contagious).

My name is Jamie, I'm 19 and an enthusiastic player (big fan of the site, by the way).
I have a question for my specific situation. In our group we have five players, including myself, and one DM. The other four players are rather new and inexperienced. Some who have played very little, some entirely unfamiliar to the game. However, all of them are wonderfully engaged in the game, especially roleplaying. I have a large advantage in our group due to the fact that I've been playing regularly for almost two years, having played almost every base class and race, and the experience of playing with different groups and DMs. I don't consider myself a better player because of this, I certainly don't lord it over everyone condescendingly but I try to help anyone who needs help doing things like leveling or understanding certain abilities that I've almost memorized. I know that our DM takes a certain amount of relief in having at least one player who can level their characters without needing it checked over for any accidental feats or extra skill points, and one willing to help others without the worry of misinformation.

In play sometimes our DM will ask me if he's correct in his memory of a rule, ability, spell, etc. not wanting to interrupt a combat scene by searching for a book. So, I have obvious acknowledgement from our DM of my sometimes obscure knowledge of the game. My concern is about the other players and our DM's feelings about my role on the edges of the game where the character and player are blurred.

I don't want the other players to feel as though I have a DM-esque authority over the game, especially if they viewed it as on par with our DM's actual authority.
My worry with our DM isn't about unintentionally stepping on his toes but that he might be too open with me about the intricacies of our campaign. I've played with our DM since he first started DMing, and have been friends even longer. I think that because I've been his only consistent player (I've never missed a session of his) he feels more comfortable involving me in the planning process of our campaigns. It's never anything huge, for example: a detail he needs to tell me about in order to make sure I'm comfortable with my character being last to have their backstory examined in the campaign, or some insight into other options for enemies (one of our players actually has an intense fear of zombies so variety in undead enemies is slightly stunted).

He might also be holding back any complaints about my behavior during a session where I might answer a question asked by another player that was probably directed more towards our DM. I don't do this often as I remember we're in-play but it happens at least once a session.

Personally, I like answering questions I know so it's hard for me to reign in the habit.
So my question is whether there's any obvious sign of oncoming problems and if there's anything I should do, or talk to him about, concerning the boundaries of the player and DM.
I'm flattered to be included in the process of campaign planning but I definitely wouldn't be selfish enough to enjoy a special status at the risk of causing tension in the group.
I'm all ears for any advice you may have.

Sincerely,

Jamie Q.

Well, Jamie, for starters -- if we didn't know any better we would swear you were talking about the Stupid Ranger. And because of this, you're going to get a couple different answers. One from a person very like yourself (Stupid Ranger), a person in a similar situation to your DM (Dante), and an indifferent third party with an opinion he cannot keep to himself (Vanir). We'll start with Vanir first.

• Vanir says:
  
  Jamie, what I think we have here is a failure to communicate. If you have not already, I would take some time before or after your next gaming session and discuss a few things with your gaming group.
  
  I would not worry so much about being the Unofficial Gaming Encyclopedia. We have one of those, and her name is Stupid Ranger. She is a valuable resource. The DM gets the final say. And by that, I mean whoever is the DM right now. We've had some issues with Dante taking a break and someone else giving it a go, and when a call needed to be made several heads turned toward Dante instead of our new guy. Not cool. You need to talk to the group and decide what the protocol is on such things. But really, it sounds like your DM trusts your judgment and will make his final call based on yours. If I had to guess, he doesn't like dealing with the rules much and you take some of the load off him. As long as the group is cool with that, then there isn't a problem.
  
  As for having "special status" -- well, again it depends on your group. Talk to your DM, talk to the other players. If one of them is angry at you, you'll find out why and be able to work something out. I applaud your sensitivity to others' feelings in the group, but it looks like you share a common problem with me in that I frequently avoid talking to the people that I worry might be mad at me. Then I attempt to figure out how I could act to prevent them being angry and dance and rules lawyer about until hilarity ensues. Even now, in our current group, every time I worry about something and sit on it and don't say anything, I end up regretting it. It's easier just to bring it up and be uncomfortable for a minute. Vanir promise.
  
  One tool that will probably help you deal with this is the Social Contract. A lot of groups use one and don't know it, but we found out about it through Martin Ralya's awesome (and sadly, on-hiatus) site Treasure Tables. You don't have to make a big deal about it, or make anyone walk the plank if they screw up one of the group's rules, but it will help you and your group establish a protocol to clear things up when you're worried about things like you described.
  
  But anyway, yeah. In short, talk to your group!

• SR says:

Jamie - I know how tough it can be to be that in-between person... you know a lot about the game and its mechanics, you have a lot of great advice to give, you want to help, but you don't want to step on anyone's toes.

I've been that person. And what I've discovered is that each group needs one of us, an adviser, to keep the game moving forward and especially to maintain the DM's sanity. The DM has to maintain the balance between plot development and game experience; adding the mechanics to this mix jumps the DC on that save. By helping out with the little details, you can make things much smoother and easier for everyone involved.

Vanir is absolutely right; you should discuss your concerns with the group. If they are happy to have you continue in this adviser role, I would give you this piece of advice: it's very important to keep your advising under control. First, you don't want to burden the group by enforcing rules that will detract from everyone's gameplay. For instance, I don't see how it's possible for anyone to spend "quality time" with their spouse while on the back of the tarrasque, but arguing those mechanics would have ruined a great story and really detracted from Vanir's roleplaying experience.

Second, the DM will ultimately make the decision, and you never want to undermine his authority by arguing if he makes a decision that is not in alignment with the rules. Having an all-out argument on the rules vs game play will definitely make it look like you think you're better than the DM, and we know that's an impression you want to avoid.

• Dante says:
  
  Jamie,
  I will give you a slightly different take than my partners-in-crime. As my friends pointed out, I suspect you may be a bit over-sensitive to the way this situation is being perceived. As a DM, I really enjoy having a few people in my group that really know the rules, or are willing to dig into the rules while I come up with The Next Big Thing on the side. This frees me to be able to worry about the compelling creative stuff while someone else argues the nuts and bolts of the fight mechanics, spell rules, or what have you.
  
  Secondly, I think that your concerns about being the DM's outlet for more confidential campaign information is well-founded. If its making you uncomfortable to know what's coming or to have extra perspective to plot points that are in progress, you simply have to ask your DM to stop including you at that level. If you don't mind it so much, I think the rest of your group will raise the issue if it is truly something they perceive badly. Personally, I try my best to not share any privileged information about the campaign in progress unless it can't be helped, or I am completely at a loss tying an aspect in to my characters backstory (read that as: I forgot something I should've known). That is my personal preference, I know there are others that roll a different way than I on that matter.
  
  Finally, if you're still feeling really badly about the level of exposure you have or how much you are influencing the gaming session, I recommend a brief stint (maybe even a one-nighter) as DM yourself. This assumes, of course, that you've never done that before... I suspect that a few sessions behind the screen will have you understanding how welcome your input is and how valuable your storyline guidance can be.
  

Thanks for writing in, Jamie! We hope our advice helps you and anybody else who finds themselves in your situation.

Jamie's letter also gave us a pretty cool idea -- if anybody else out there could use some advice, we think it'd be pretty cool to have a semi-regular advice column. If you'd like to take 12d6 of advice damage and promise to fail your save, please email us at contact@stupidranger.com.

Things You Should Never, Ever Do

This post actually comes from a relatively weird place. You see, my good friend Vanir was scoping out Living Dice and linked me to a story where they were discussing the creepiest or most disgusting gamers that people have ever come across in their travels. After reading a few of these I was shocked... I thought that gamers like this were overblown stereotypes, misconceptions concocted by those that don't understand our ways.

I was appalled to behold the tale of Jack. This single story has eroded my faith in our subculture's ability to conduct itself.

Please allow me to lay a few things out for you all.

We aren't the largest site on the Internet, however there is a somewhat increased chance that the Jack's of the world might be reading this site so there are a few things that I have to say.

1. Wear deodorant - They tell you this in the GenCon Book every year, and its not a funny joke. If you don't shower every day of the convention, at least have the decency to fall on top of some SpeedStick or spray yourself with some Axe before you leave the hotel in teh morning.
   
   GenCon is a very magical place, however it does not prevent you from sweating if you are normally susceptible to perspiration. Magic like that cannot be contained by the RCA Dome.
   
   
2. I can't believe I have to spell this out, but don't crap yourself around others. Now, I've been known to bust some stink occasionally, but if you know there's a greater than 70% chance that The Real Deal will occur, go to the can.
   
   And I promise you this: if I am at the gaming table with you at GenCon and you crap your pants and don't have a medical reason to do so, I'm going to punch you in the throat. Adult human beings should not need to have this explained to them.
   
   
3. Don't be annoying. This is a general rule, but applies to the rest of the areas of nuance that I don't have the bandwidth to elaborate upon here: Just because you think its ok doesn't mean that it is.
   
   Jack's story had me really taking stock of my annoying habits, thankfully I don't believe that I or any of my campaign-mates have flaws as grandiose as ol' Jack. A little introspection can't hurt though... try and rank the top three things that you do that might offend sensibilities, and do the rest of society a favor and work on these things a little bit.
   
   I'll even start for you: aside from the aforementioned relieving of gas, I sometimes make large scale crude and/or offensive jokes during our gaming session. Most of our group doesn't mind these things, but I'm aware of it to know when enough is enough (most of the time). Acknowledging it is the first step to eliminating it, so I suggest some stock-taking occur for the better good.
   
   For the record: that includes answering nature's call in front of other humans with reckless abandon.

I hope I don't have to revisit this topic.

There are many other rules that dictate common social graces that nerds need to examine, but I hope we don't have to start a regular feature here about what not to do when around other members of the human race.

If you want a little continued reading on the matter, visit the forum I linked above and read all about the worst of the worst. If you recognize yourself in any of those stories, change your freaking behavior!

Win 4e Books at Dungeon Mastering

Our good buddy Yax over at Dungeon Mastering is hosting a contest where you can win a free set of D&D 4E books if you subscribe to his RSS feed via email, and he's asked us to spread the word.

So, if you:

A. like getting emails with cool D&D stuff in them

and

B. enjoy getting free D&D books

then I would highly recommend you go get more information at the following link lest we think you have taken temporary stat damage to your INT and WIS scores.



http://www.dungeonmastering.com/news/dnd-4e-subscribe-and-win

Consider yourselves informed!!!!!!!!!!

If Swapping Feats Does Not Make Sense, You Must Acquit

Saturday night while leveling up, we all were pleased to discover we were level 21 and thusly able to take our first real live Epic Feat. I decided to go for Epic Inspiration from the DMG, which would make many of the effects of my music last 10x longer. However, way back at first level, I had taken Lingering Song from Song & Silence, which just doubled it.

Given that I now had redundant feats, I decided to use the retraining rules from the PHB2 that let you swap feats. I was all ready to take this cool feat that let my music affect the undead and swap out Lingering Song when I read a little passage that basically derailed my plans. Apparently, if you're going to swap a feat out, you can only take another feat that you would have met the prerequisites for at the time you took the first feat. And since I took Lingering Song at first level.... I couldn't so much do it.

Well, needless to say, this got my bardic panties in an uproar and I immediately brought this offense to the attention of our DM's. It simply did not make sense that I wouldn't be able to swap these, not knowing that I would need to keep track of my prerequisites when I take every feat. Hell, the PHB2 and this silly rule wasn't even out when I made Bat Loaf. Plus it was redundant and it was sort of an upgrade anyway. And I didn't meet the prerequisites then but I certainly do NOW. And I should be able to swap my feats without these silly arbitrary rules getting in the way dammit!

Our DM's carefully thought about the situation and determined that no, there's a reason for this. Taking a feat with prerequisites means it's more powerful. And if I can just swap out all my first level feats for stuff that I couldn't take until 15th level, I'm going to be a lot more powerful. Some might even say unbalanced.

Unfortunately, that made sense to me, so I was forced to stop my campaign to get my feat swapped out. Fortunately, the Stupid Ranger was at the table and quickly determined two things. First, I had taken Skill Focus (Perform) as my last feat, which I could take whenever the hell I wanted (including first level). Secondly, I had somehow forgotten to take a feat somewhere along the way. Which she figured out two seconds after seeing my list of feats somehow. ("Are you a human? Did you forget your bonus feat at first level?") She scares me sometimes, but I am really glad she is on our side.

Anyway, now I've got all the feats I wanted plus one I didn't know I was going to get. The moral of the story? There are two, in my mind:

• As a DM, you are going to have players (like me) who are going to argue that rules should be changed because they "don't make sense".
• As a player, you must realize that some rules really don't make sense, but are necessary for game balance.

Honestly, I sort of suspected there was a reason behind the feat-swapping rule, but I just wanted to see if I could push my luck. But one of the hardest things for me to deal with when roleplaying is a rule that exists just to support part of the system. A good example of this is the rumored 4th edition rule where a magic ring will work for an 11th level character but not for a 10th.

I ran across a fantastic post on the ENworld forums that helped explain it a little to me -- there are Simulationists (people like me, who think the rules should reflect how things would work in the "real" world) and Gamists (people who think gaming systems should be balanced and the world constructed to meet those rules). I think 4E is going more toward the Gamists, which I can't honestly say I'm happy about, but I did realize something important that is going to help me deal when 4E drops:

The real world isn't fair. People have unfair advantages all the time. People get screwed all the time. That's just the way it works. Gaming (well, good gaming) doesn't work like that. Steps are taken to ensure that play is balanced so everybody has a good time. And if you attempt to make sense and install order in a simulation of the real world (or a fantasy version thereof), it starts to get arbitrary and unnatural. The trick, I think, is going to be putting in just enough rules so it's balanced enough but not so much that you might as well play World of Warcraft.

The thought occurs to me that maybe I don't like this shift in gaming because it's going to be a lot harder to rules lawyer and get Dante to agree to silly things. I am crafty, though. We shall ponder this, yes.

Behind the Screen: Some weather we're having...

Here in StupidRangerVille, we have been experiencing some very strange weather today. It is what is known as a thundersnow (or winter thunderstorm) where the primary precipitation of snow and sleet is accompanied by thunder and lightning... it is relatively rare and quite interesting to behold.

Sir Geekelot, one of our current campaign-members messaged me to confirm said strange weather and heralded it as a sign of The Apocalypse... and that got me thinking about weather in the context of our D&D sessions.

Wow, it's raining again...

In most of my campaigns we have often hand-waved weather, or used it as a relatively cliche' foreshadowing element to illustrate impending doom. I know that many rules systems exist for actually interacting with weather-systems and how to use it in your settings, but often having to look up those charts for movement encumbrance or situational modifiers to attack and damage is too much work for me so I regularly just use an ad-hoc method of doling out pluses or minuses depending on the situation in front of me.

I have found that as characters advance in levels, their level of concern for environmental conditions seem to wane. Flipping through a few of the Monster Manuals, I have found a few elemental based baddies that seem to be intense concentrations of (or elementals created by) terrible weather conditions. We had a seafaring campaign in college that actually got to experience some of those creatures first-hand, and I can tell you that it is a unique experience.

If you don't like the weather, just wait a few days.

I haven't loosed any of these terrors on our current campaign (yet), but I would be interested to hear if anyone has done anything cool with the weather based elemental creatures or used weather in an interesting way to color your campaigns.

Has anyone been able to make the environment significant enough that characters actually care how it impacts them as they progress to higher levels?

Before everyone starts sending us boxes of E.L. Fudge cookies and order-by-phone pizzas as provisions, never fear... its supposed to be 50 degrees here tomorrow! (Although donations of sugar and pizza are always readily accepted!)