What makes a "bad GM" or a "bad player"?

[Wolfpack48]

One of my happiest moments in my previous campaign was when I had an NPC begging and grovelling and crying at a PCs feet, desperate for aid, and the player turned her away.

It was great to know that I could put absolutely everything into playing that NPC, without fear that the player would feel obliged to take up the adventure hook.

Now, I'm not saying that's appropriate for every game -- not everyone wants to run or participate in a sandbox where you can refuse absolute any plot hook for any reason -- but I am saying that this is another example of bad fit, rather than an objectively bad player.

Yeah, if I was playing in a pure sandbox campaign, it wouldn’t bother me at all, and I could see players doing wildly divergent things and having fun if that were the norm.

Only in a time boxed game where we’ve all agreed to do a structured adventure would it be a problem (and a bad fit), but it could be handled pretty easily by setting expectations beforehand. If the player acted this way, however, even after setting down expectations, I’d have to ask the player why they’re doing it.

 

[aramis erak]

Generally, each table is functionally a social contract - If you note, most of my Bad Player list are generally anti-social behaviors.

Sure, some people don't care about lying about dice or stats - but for the majority of the hundreds of players I've run for, the idea that one of the about 10 who've lied about same have been really annoying to everyone else at the table.
I've had to deal with it as a GM because it pisses off other players. Which is why I consider it antisocial.

AS someone who loves both board games and RPGs, if someone's not there for the RPG as RPG, I'd rather they picked a different night and we played more casual games. I enjoy a good discussion whilst playing Mah Jongg or Hand & Foot.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yeah, if I was playing in a pure sandbox campaign, it wouldn’t bother me at all, and I could see players doing wildly divergent things and having fun if that were the norm.

Though as I've noted, even when I ran sandboxes, I didn't want to deal with handling six different games at once for six players.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Though as I've noted, even when I ran sandboxes, I didn't want to deal with handling six different games at once for six players.

Running 6 separate solo adventures at the same time wouldn't be much fun as a referee, though maybe someone could pull it off. Even a sandbox game needs to have some boundaries, cohesion and party unity.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Running 6 separate solo adventures at the same time wouldn't be much fun as a referee, though maybe someone could pull it off. Even a sandbox game needs to have some boundaries, cohesion and party unity.

I ran a bunch of semi-independent things in a superhero game many years ago, but there was a lot less overhead on that.

 

[Reynard]

I ran a bunch of semi-independent things in a superhero game many years ago, but there was a lot less overhead on that.

Blue booking FTW!

 

[loverdrive]

While I think there are many "paper cuts" that can make a bad GM or player, the overwhelming factor that overrides everything else is simple: inability to set expectations and stick to them.

If I am invited to "uhmm a game I guess it will be cool!", nah, I'm not going. If I was invited to a Hong Kong kung fu cinema inspired game and then we spend most of the session investigating a mystery, I don't care whether the mystery is cool and gripping, that wasn't something I signed up for. If I invite you to a Hong Kong kung fu cinema inspired game and you show up with a guy who can't do kung fu, I don't care how interesting and deep your character is.

Or, well, the most mundane thing, if I invite you to a campaign on Tuesday evenings and then you keep asking for rain checks, why the hell did you even accept the invitation?

 

[CleverNickName]

Lack of communication. Not responding to (or even reading) emails or text messages, not updating the schedule calendar, cancelling at the last minute because you "just remembered" you had plans...and then complaining about how you are "totally lost" and "can't follow the plot" (if you're a player) or about how "nobody is taking it seriously anymore" and you "need more engagement" (if you're the DM).

If we communicate, we can handle just about any problem that comes up as a group. But if you don't/can't/won't communicate, you are the problem.

 

[Lanefan]

Running 6 separate solo adventures at the same time wouldn't be much fun as a referee, though maybe someone could pull it off. Even a sandbox game needs to have some boundaries, cohesion and party unity.

If the players sometimes resemble a herd of cats, that in no way makes them "bad" IMO.

And there's times when they do split up and go their separate ways for a while, with or without* intending to; and people just recognize that things are going to be a bit on the inefficient side for a while because of this.

* - I once DMed a situation where a wild magic surge caused the ten characters in a party to teleport to ten different (random) places in the rather big dungeon they were in at the time. Yeah, that was fun.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Blue booking FTW!

I've done that too, but this was face to face. Its just easier to frame things in a modern game without having to go into as much detail.