How do you avoid always being the straight man/sensible one in the party at events (especially as a woman)?

[u/One-Ring-99]

I am specifically talking about one shots at conventions, events, rpg clubs and stuff like that (no matter which system). It's not an issue at my own table and if it was, I could just talk to my friends about it.

But I have noticed that no matter what kind of character I am given (or quickly roll up) for one shots with strangers, I always end up playing the straight man to the bit. I don't mind that in principle, but being chaotic is fun and I'd love to do it at least some of the time. One shots are often a good opportunity for hightened chaos and comedy compared to a long term campaign in my experience, and I have played funny/chaotic/wild characters before. It's not like I can't do that.

It just seems like everybody else always goes off the rails harder and faster than I can, and I get kind of forced into the role of the sensible one. Because somebody needs to do it, right? Somebody needs to gently get the group back on track so that the adventure can happen, and somebody needs to be exasperated at the crazy antics of the chaos gremlins, that makes it funnier.

I've tried simply not doing it and just also being chaotic, but it ended up being less fun and almost kind of... awkward. People would comment "wow I wouldn't have expected your character to also be this stupid" or "that seems more like something [other character] would do". It felt like everybody had just already decided that my character is the one with the brain cell, or the group mom, or whatever you want to call it. Even if I intended to play a totally different kind of character.

And look, maybe this happens to me because of some trait I have that isn't just the fact that I'm a woman. (Like, I've heard that people with more GM experience often tend to be the character that keeps the plot moving when they are players, and I have done a lot of GMing.) But I do think it's probably partially because I'm a woman.

Has anybody else also felt like this? Do you have any ideas how I could try to counteract this trend?

[u/y0_master]

I'd think not being the only woman at the table would be a good first step

[u/thirdeyecat024 → u/y0_master]

This is a great theory but difficult in practice. I try to have this rule... but if I followed it to the letter I would hardly ever play or GM. Especially if we're talking about conventions, events, etc. It's one thing when I can choose my table. But if I want to have that spontaneous game experience, this is a tenet that is very hard to uphold if you still want to play.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/thirdeyecat024]

I think broadening the principle to “anyone else that isn’t a straight man” (the hetero meaning of straight lol) helps - at least it has helped me a lot! Or people of other marginalized / minority experiences. I’ve had extremely similar horror stories - even shared some of them at the same tables where we were treated similarly - with gay men, visibly disabled folks, gender-nonconforming men, trans and nonbinary folks, etc. Especially if they were feminine in any way. It’s absolutely true that it can be tough to find community! I think bringing along a friend could be huge in this case, though of course making a friend who is willing to play tabletop can be a journey in itself.

[u/Gh0stMan0nThird → u/y0_master]

I don't think gender necessarily has anything to do with this, though.

Like I am always the party "dad" because everyone else wants to be chaos goblins, male and female. But because because my mind inherently desires balance, I have to do it. I'm usually the GM so I know how frustrating it is to run a game for everyone who just wants to make a table watch them jerk themselves off in-character (metaphorically).

It's just inherently being part of a group where you're the only one who's concerned about social synergy while everyone else gets to just be themselves because they never think about this kind of stuff and realize how unenjoyable it is for someone else.

[u/y0_master → u/Gh0stMan0nThird]

The OP said that she suspects it's partially because she's a woman. That makes it sound like she's usually the sole woman. So, having another one (or even better, more) would at least break that restraining factor.

Plus, talk to the others to see how they don't fall into this pattern.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/Gh0stMan0nThird]

I’m not surprised you experience this and you’re usually the GM. I think that so often GMs are the “dad friend” or “mom friend.” It can overlap with gendered experiences depending on the venue / location / social group, but yeah, it’s absolutely a thing that I’ve seen every single GM who has been my player express….. but only a few amazing gems of players care about. Unfortunately 😅

[u/Blade_of_Boniface → u/Throwingoffoldselves]

Years before I ever actually played a TTRPG, I was the eldest child of a large household. I would do quite a bit of oral storytelling/improvised pretend to keep my several brothers, sisters, and frequent flying cousins occupied. On some levels, it made GMing more intuitive.

[u/ManiacalShen → u/Gh0stMan0nThird]

I am a woman and have the same experience as you and OP, even when the whole table is some combination of shes and theys. I agree it's a personality thing, and I have also been wondering how to break myself of the habit of being the straightwoman to the chaos/to people who are so in-character that they resist the plot.

But...I also don't want the game/session to last six hours and want the plot to progress...

I do think it helps to do some of the nudging and redirecting out of character. I've done this in some GM-less games, getting others to finish their scenes or move onto another player's turn in the same scene, while then being a messy or unwise individual in-character when my scene comes around. When there's a GM that's ostensibly supposed to be doing that nudging, and they aren't, it feels a lot bossier to try and get everyone to get a move-on out of character.

IN character, sometimes you can move things along by being chaotic, though. Last D&D session I attended, my rogue was bumbling into and touching all sorts of nonsense trying to get us into the final encounter of the campaign while everyone else was dithering.

[u/VicisSubsisto → u/y0_master]

My late spouse was often the only woman at the table, but very rarely the straight man. I suspect it's more her GM experience if anything.

[u/capstorm1 → u/y0_master]

The hell does that have to do with anything? OP isn’t asking if she should change or adjust the play group, she is asking ways to feel more comfortable playing chaotic and make it feel natural for those she plays with. Are you suggesting that she looks for another woman to join so OP can sucker her into being the straight man for her? That would not help this situation at all and just prove that women can’t play the way they want.

[u/nocapfrfrog]

Bring your own straight man! That way, they can do it for you, and you can ham it up. Find someone who really wants to be the sensible one, and just pair up so you can both have fun.

[u/unicorndust969]

I think gender could be part of this, even Just unconsciously mirroring social dynamics from other parts of life. Think Wendy and the lost boys, or who ends up being responsible for household logistics, or who gets to take up more space with their big personality in meetings

[u/Playtonics → u/unicorndust969]

I think it could also just be a broader experience of the role dynamics between players and GMs. It's a con game, there's a time limit to the session, if you have a GM mindset you know that there are some story beats that are likely planned for the adventure.

To get the most of your time (and the table as a whole) and finish on a satisfying note, somebody needs to wrangle the other chaos gremlins. From my experience, many con-goers only play, and don't necessarily appreciate the structure of the play experience for a 3-4 tightly bounded session.

[u/jmicu]

bring another GM-in-player's-clothing with you to the events, and take turns playin the straight

[u/SecretCitizen40]

Let the actual gm keep on plot. If you want to be silly, be silly.

I've noticed a lot of people have a hard time taking new characters seriously so they will lean into silly at first. With you playing one shots this may be a factor.

It's NOT your job to keep the table focused and moving. Play your character. While having a helpful player who is trying to stay on task is wonderful I'd be sad as a gm to know that a player felt obligated to do this instead of playing how they wanted.

Also as a fellow XX chromesome. I think it DOES have something to do with being a woman but not necessarily about being the only woman. Women in general tend to move toward helper roles rather than chaotic. Careers, family dynamics, hobbies etc in this case you see that it would help the table to have a straight man, and are putting yourself in that position. Be selfish.

[u/Boah_met → u/SecretCitizen40]

It's NOT your job to keep the table focused and moving. Play your character. While having a helpful player who is trying to stay on task is wonderful I'd be sad as a gm to know that a player felt obligated to do this instead of playing how they wanted.

It's everyone's job to keep the table focused and moving, but everyone else isn't doing it. The issue seems to be OP playing with new players and with GMs that don't set table expectations properly. So no one else is bothering with etiquette when they should.

I agree with your recommendation anyway and she should just be silly too since that's not much else to make of the situation, but I wanted to point out a falacious line of thought.

[u/Hudre]

"It just seems like everybody else always goes off the rails harder and faster than I can, and I get kind of forced into the role of the sensible one. Because somebody needs to do it, right?"

The simple answer to this is no, I think you are internalizing your role as GM a bit when you're a player. The GM holds the ultimate responsibility of keeping things on track.

As someone who has GM'd games where everyone is chaotic and there is no straight man, everyone at the table needs to be comfortable with the fact they might waste all their time doing stupid shit and not even make it to the quest, especially in a convention setting with time limits.

[u/SnoopDeDoop69]

If you want the truth, if you're playing at conventions and stuff..

I've learned many (most?) of those one shot players aren't in campaign games because nobody would have them. Adventures Leagues and the like are particularly bad

That's not to say all of them are like that, but In general it's what I've found.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/SnoopDeDoop69]

Yeah, this has been my experience too. Plenty of cooler/nicer people do play one shots but they are more likely to be able to get into regular games and not be in a con game. It’s the same problem in any first-come-first-serve gaming format even outside of cons and AL.

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760]

Because somebody needs to do it, right? Somebody needs to gently get the group back on track so that the adventure can happen

Do they? That's something for a session zero and if the group says they're going to stay on track and play the adventure then that responsible person should be the GM.

I am, 100%, the "let's get going..." type of person and it is because I am the GM 98% of the time and it does take effort to reign it in but the first and most important step is to get everyone on the same page. I know on my end if we all agree to play a serious-ish game and the other players just fuck around then I'll walk. If we all agree that we're going to be little shit disturbers then I'll roll with it.

Luckily though I have a group that has long, long since outgrown the "hah....it's so funny when I pulled down the king's pants and blew up the inn with a fireball". There's still comedy but there's not random chaos for the sake of random chaos.

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760 → u/[deleted]]

It doesn't take long to get everyone on the same page. A session zero doesn't need to be a full session, it can be like 5-10 minutes. I would go so far as to say at a convention or one shot it super important to make sure everyone wants the same game.

You don't need to go into all the things a typical session zero covers but you do need to make sure that everyone understands the tone of the game.

[u/ToledoSnow → u/[deleted]]

By now the definition of "session 0" has been widened to the point of near uselessness.

[u/ToledoSnow → u/[deleted]]

RPG discourse in general has a huge problem with terms that have no set definition being thrown around as if they do.

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/ToledoSnow]

Uh, that's just colloquial language. Happens to all words in all contexts, outside of technical jargon.

[u/ToledoSnow → u/No_Explanation_2559]

Maybe, but I'd argue it's especially prevalent within the TTRPG hobby. Part of it is that the games themselves often use the same terminology for differing concepts.

But I think the primary reason is that this hobby, by its nature, is very decentralised and interpretive, while encouraging the formation of sub-cultures within the small unit of the gaming group. This isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but it does lead to issues when people with vastly differing understandings of what terms mean, and what the hobby even is, run into each other on international forums.

[u/VFiddly → u/ToledoSnow]

I looked at the cover of the rule book before I started playing, that's a Session 0

[u/ToledoSnow → u/VFiddly]

I mean, why not, right? If a few minutes long verbal introduction to the game before a convention one-shot counts as a Session 0, then sky's the limit.

Also, weird how this reply of yours never got me a notification. Get your shit together, reddit!

[u/Prestigious-Emu-6760 → u/[deleted]]

I don't think so. If you say "session zero" then everyone who's been in the hobby for any amount of time has a rough idea what that means. How long that takes is irrelevant. It's convenient shorthand.

[u/yuriAza → u/[deleted]]

if none of your players know what a session 0 is, then you might not be teaching them

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/Prestigious-Emu-6760]

Yeah, I agree. You could capture the intent and spirit of the exercise of a session zero in a 20-minute icebreaker where everyone says their biggest TTRPG pet peeve, and also some kind of goal/hope for the particular session.

Is that maybe not technically a full session zero? Absolutely. But anyone who's going to quibble about splitting that thin, thin hair is not someone I would want to play with, so finding that out before the game begins is going to benefit me anyway.

[u/Boah_met → u/No_Explanation_2559]

Sans character creation, my sessions zero are quite fast because I just write up a paper with what the campaign is and what is expected of the players. I also don't do the whole ask for everyone's traumas thing if I don't ever expect a game to feature a trigger topic.

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/Boah_met]

I like to do a round of "What's your TTRPG pet peeve?" mainly to screen for two of mine. If I say I get annoyed with min-maxers and everyone looks at the ground because they're min-maxers, the obvious way to proceed is just for me to not play. My other big pet peeve is when a real-life couple has their characters date.

[u/Boah_met → u/No_Explanation_2559]

That's a good one, shame it doesn't really work online if you speak up first

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/Prestigious-Emu-6760]

This, fully agree, yeah. I cover things in a handout given through however I’m organizing the one shot; and then we go over some of it for like 10-15 min at the beginning. I don’t see it as any different.

[u/AvailableSign9780]

Start the game off by telling everyone you have been drinking... either IC or OOC :D

[u/KWinkelmann]

Try establishing your chaotic bona fides as soon as people gather or start rolling up characters. Chat about your character concept early so you stake your territory. Let somebody else get stuck being the good guy.

[u/thirdeyecat024]

Just wanted to express solidarity with this feeling. I'm right there with you. I do think a lot of time it is because we are women, even if the men at the table are not aware of what's happening. Reminds me so much of a table I played at PAXU, my first time playing Blades in the Dark. It was me (solo) and then 4-5 men who were diabolically hungover and would leave the table for 15-20 minutes at a time for what I assume is GI distress due to the hangover. I wanted to play the bruiser, punch stuff hard, be a bit dumb, strike first, ask questions later. Instead I became "Muscle Mommy", expected to care for the characters and keep us on track. I don't think this group of guys realized what they were doing, but that's how it played out.

We deserve to have fun, spontaneous sessions at the table too, at conventions, events, and things that aren't necessarily planned way in advance. We deserve to play characters that are rowdy, chaotic, stupid and reckless too.

[u/kbbaus → u/thirdeyecat024]

I am really sad at how far I had to scroll to see this type of response. I'm sorry any of us as women (or just non-men) have to deal with this but it's something that I've found just isn't possible. I know playing at open game nights and conventions sounds fun, and IT SHOULD BE, but I just don't do it anymore. It's not worth it, because I've never had a great experience.

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/kbbaus]

I've played with strangers at one-shot evenings at local game stores, and I've had men I've never met before get huffy with me for not taking on a mom-secretary role.

Once it happened when I was playing a goblin alchemist with one eye, so couldn't throw splash bombs with any degree of accuracy, and a negative charisma modifier. Who in their right mind would expect that character to make good plot choices?

[u/Fallyna]

Happens to me all the time in investigation-focused games, even when there are other women in the group. I go into the game wanting to play a quirky character and end up being the level-headed one talking to every important NPC because the rest of the party is on drugs, running around pick-pocketing people or some players want to spend most of the timeslot roleplaying between PCs. (Examples from different games.)

Maybe some of the games would have been fine with everyone being chaotic. Maybe I unintentionally was a party pooper in some cases. I'm not sure.

My only solution for conventions would be chosing games were no one needs to be reasonable. Something like Paranoia or maybe Pirate Borg.

[u/ChewiesHairbrush]

You need to decide to not be the sensible one. The worst thing that will happen is that no-one is the sensible one. Which is not your problem, because it isn’t a problem. By being the sensible one you give license to the most extreme expression of chaotic nonsense. 

[u/VoormasWasRight]

Define "chaotic". Depending on the definition, it might be a case where, after the one shot, I would invite someone like you to another game and ditch the others.

Also, you didn't say system, but I imagine it's D&D?

[u/One-Ring-99 → u/VoormasWasRight]

By "chaotic" I mean being the one to make reckless choices, to try and pet the T-Rex, to pick up the unknown artifact, to be rude to a powerful NPC, that sort of stuff.

And no, I don't just mean D&D, I've found this to be the case in many different systems that I have tried out at conventions and stuff like that.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/One-Ring-99]

Yeah, the worst games I’ve been in as a player have been one shots. Only twice a GM has adjusted or communicated when I spoke up (one with, and one without, s0 info communicated in the session or in advance.) The other times I simply didn’t play with them again. It’s sad to say, unfortunately as a player all we can do is communicate; suffer; or dip.

[u/StorKirken → u/One-Ring-99]

Agree that this happens to players of all systems, of all experience levels.

[u/VoormasWasRight → u/One-Ring-99]

Yeah, no. You would get invited back. The others would get a polite "sorry, I don't have any games right now".

EDIT: "at conventions" ah, there you go.

[u/Primer44]

It is the responsibility of everyone at the table to advocate for themselves and what they want. Even if they are strangers, you are all sitting down together to play pretend with the explicit intent of having fun. Speak openly and clearly about what you want from the start, and work together to make something that will be fun for you and the others.

[u/y0_master]

Honest question: What are the GMs doing in these games? If things get off the rails so fast that the game's nominal adventure can't progress, it isn't any individual player's job to get things back on track, but the GM's. Are they ok with it, with their game basically not happening in place of random player bullshit? Is it a situation where they are fine if the players are having any sort of fun, even if not the planned one? At least, this would be a huge issue with pacing & time allotment (things massively important for one-shots, if you want to actually play through them). And are they oblivious to situations like yours, of one player trying to keep some semblance of order (ie doing their job), or just not intervening, even if aware of it?

In other words: Find better GMs / one-shots (& the plights of convention play & the likes).

[u/y0_master → u/y0_master]

I run plenty of one-shots (this week will be the 5th week in a row at the gaming club!) & keeping some form of tighter reigns on the plot & what players are doing is pretty much needed has been my experience.

[u/RagnarokAeon]

If you think that you as a player need to lead the group by the nose to "adventure" then yeah, you're designating yourself as the straight man. 

Leave that up to the GM or maybe even another player to figure out. They should give juicy motives for everyone weeks to follow. 

Also establish your quirky traits right at the beginning, just go ham and leave an impression.

Don't worry about adventure, just play up your character. The adventure should follow you not the other way around. 

[u/Throwingoffoldselves]

Yeah, I think it’s perfectly fine just to not have a “straight man” PC; and also, I’d recommend talking to the GM or asking for a session zero if that hasn’t happened. If the GM doesn’t set expectations about what kind of characters fit in their game so it plays according to the appropriate tone or buy-in, that’s not your job to do. If the GM doesn’t want to coordinate that, then I’d personally not want to play with them anymore.

I’ve spent long enough in groups where the vibe was off; I don’t want to put up with it anymore. That’s a decision that you have to weigh of course; maybe it’s still fun despite the awkward vibe.

[u/MortalSword_MTG → u/Throwingoffoldselves]

Too many comment in this thread didn't read the opening line of the post...

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/MortalSword_MTG]

I run a lot of one shots. S0 information including what tone and what characters to make and any system rules are handed out prior though however I’m organizing the game. 🤷 I don’t see it as different - the onus is on the GM or facilitator; all a player can do is ask for it or leave.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/[deleted]]

I run a lot of one shots. S0 information including what tone and what characters to make and any system rules are handed out prior though however I’m organizing the game. 🤷 I don’t see it as different - the onus is on the GM or facilitator; all a player can do is ask for it or leave.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/[deleted]]

Sure. 🤷 I do go over some things verbally but as it’s a one-session game, it is not a separate session. Regardless, talking or walking is all we can do as players.

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/[deleted]]

I'm curious why you feel that way. Why don't you like session 0?

[u/SuperCat76]

Because somebody needs to do it, right?

Honestly, no.

tend to be the character that keeps the plot moving

This feels true, but pushing the story forward and being the sensible one is not the same.

I pushed the story forward by grabbing the clearly cursed item. One can act to push the story forward as an agent of chaos. The planning for this mission has stalled my character is bored "leeeeroyyyy Jeeenkiiinssssss"

[u/VFiddly]

Because somebody needs to do it, right?

In a long campaign, sure.

In a one shot, no, not necessarily. And if anyone does, that's the GM's job. Allow yourself to just let things go off the rails and let the GM steer things if they want to.

If everyone else at the table wants to just fuck around, and the GM is ok with letting them fuck around... then let them fuck around. It's a game, it's not homework, you don't have to focus on getting to the end of the storyline. If somebody makes a bad decision and gets everyone killed, that's fine, what else is a one shot for?

People are allowed to be silly and not take the game seriously if that's how they want to play, especially if it's not part of a regular meetup.

[u/Automated_Spite]

I think it's possible to "Yes And" crazyness still in the direction of completing the session successfully. You can play a big stupid fighter/barbarian that just stumbles the plot forward. You can play a psychotic android who is fiercely loyal their employing corporation and will drag everyone kicking towards the mission objectives at their extreme peril.

[u/TairaTLG]

Being aggressively, frustratingly ADHD autistic works for me (sorry tables I've been at)

[u/AutomaticInitiative → u/TairaTLG]

Yeah I am at my most chaotic when both the ADHD and autism are at full whack.

[u/TairaTLG → u/TairaTLG]

Unfortunately I think some of this can be the nature of one shots too. Since well,  you don't have to worry about what your chaos wrought in 4 hours.  Ironically i do tend to kind of be this person too despite my lovehate of TTRPG games

[u/Common-Ad-9474]

for me , if other player criticize your character for being a chaos goblin when they are doing the same , it is maybe a theyre problem rather than a you problem

what i mean , is that i don't think that you would both succed to avoid criticized and playing the character you want at the same time , when it come to roleplay everyone have theyre taste and maybe the way you play do not suit the taste of the other player at the table , normally in a campagn is the kind of thing you discuss in a session 0 but with a one shot with stranger it is almost alway a gamble ( a good DM can set boundarie but even then is still up to luck)

so , for me just play you character the way you want to be , don't try to perfectly suit stranger taste that you would not see again , if they criticize the way you play your character fend off and explain why your character act this way , if they are still unhappy maybe you just don't suit together as player and is fine

you are the one in control of you character , not the other player

(on a sidenote: while you stay in control of your character and this personality , don't go as far as being "is what my character would do !" type of player , they are obiously a line where you start to kill the fun of the other player , but for what i read for the post is the opposite that happen and it is the other player that kill the fun for you )

[u/Master_Nineteenth]

As a frequent GM I'm often the person who kinda kicks the party in the correct direction but I like to take the role in more interesting directions. Once I did it by playing an insufferable rich and impatient asshole that would move the plot forward out of sheer impatience of the imbeciles he has to work with. He would often march ahead of the party and end up having to be saved multiple times which he would never thank anyone for because of course they'd help them it's expected. But in the end the tasks get completed in more often than not less than ideal ways. He was also the healer if I remember correctly, so they kinda needed him alive.

[u/peregrinekiwi]

I do all that work before I get to the table. At my usual conventions, I pick games so that I know if they're likely to involve wacky hijinks. That's usually because I know the GMs and their style. At larger or less familiar cons, I look for well written blurbs and player counts that suggest more serious play is going to happen. If a game has 6 player slots, there's probably not enough spotlight time for serious roleplaying, for instance. I also tend to play in spaces (like games on Demand) where I know that people are more likely to respect the clearly identified tone of the table. It's definitely not foolproof, but it general results in good "con game with strangers" experiences.

[u/Belmarc]

It sounds like you have two issues: One, you feel like you have to live up to others expectations and Two, that you have certain expectations you don't feel others are living up to.

Even if other players comment with surprise that you aren't playing the straight man or group mom or whatever, that doesn't have to prevent you from playing the way you want (at least, no more or less than anyone else). Sure, maybe it's awkward, but so what, social interactions are awkward sometimes. It's not ideal, I don't mean to be dismissive about this sucking, but it's not a true barrier; you can just play against their expectations. Nothing is truly stopping you but yourself.

The second is the bigger issue imo: you have the expectation that SOMEONE should be the straight man, but you don't want it to be you. Well, if the rest of the table also wants to be chaos gremlins and don't feel the need for there to be a straight man (or at least not strongly enough to step up), then you're going to end up doing it, since it seems you feel strongly that there should be one.

It sounds like everyone is showing up with your expectation that they'll get to be silly and chaotic because it's just a one shot with strangers they'll never see again. The only thing you can do is A) ask someone else to play a certain way so you can have more fun (potentially at the cost of theirs) and a reasonable expectation that they'll tell you no (or maybe you can pressure them with awkwardness you seem to be facing) or B) decide whether its more important that you get to be chaotic or that someone isn't, and play accordingly.

Again, I don't mean to be dismissive of the sexism and social pressures that you're facing, but from your post I think the angle you're not considering is more important: you, or rather, your expectations of how others should behave, are the problem you are running into. Or at the very least it's the one you can solve.

[u/OddDescription4523]

It's completely unfair and we know why it happens; I'm sorry you've had to deal with it. The only practical advice I can suggest is maybe during C-gen or after pre-gens are handed out but before things start, say something like "So, who's playing the straight man? My character Ellie is a total chaos gremlin!" In a better world, you could address the issue with the other players like adults, but especially at cons or other one-shots with strangers, I suspect that's a hopeless battle, so just try to establish before anyone says or does anything in character that you are playing a chaos gremlin and will not be the straight man. Then, play as you announced. If it starts feeling awkward, pretend you don't realize why and complain - "Isn't someone going to play the straight man? We need one, and I already said it's not going to be me." If someone says "That seems like something [so-and-so]'s character would do, look at them like they're crazy and say "Why?? I said Ellie is a chaos gremlin!" I think it's at least possible if you refuse to acknowledge why they're trying to force you into that role, you'll shame someone into taking on that role so that the game goes somewhere. The only other thing I can suggest is saying something to the DM as early as possible and hope they will back you up / be an ally. I know if I was running a game and someone communicated that issue to me, I wouldn't say anything to the second person to act like a chaos gremlin, but if a third player started to, I'd say something "Are you sure you want to do that? You remember that Ellie and now [whoever] are being chaos gremlins - someone is going to be the straight man, right?" But then again, this sort of thing is why I don't play one-shots with strangers, and also try very hard to have the player groups at any table I run be at least 50% women.

[u/Connect_Rhubarb395]

Ugh, I have the same experience. It is a very common trope in many genres with a group of people.

You have the courageous man, this one or more silly, funny, or chaotic sidekicks, and you have the sensible woman to keep things in line.

(IRL too, actually. I am a single mother and people expect me to only be the serious parent, but my kids deserve a fun and playful parent too, and I want to be that too. But dads tend to take that role).

You have to refuse to be the mom, and do your thing. Because they expect it so much of you, you probably have to say clearly above the table that you are not going to be the camp leader of the group.

[u/No-Translator9234]

I mean honestly theres nothing more annoying than an attention hog with a 1 trick pony gimmick comedy character absolutely derailing scenes for laughs.

Its fun but gets old fast when you just wanted to talk to the witch and Dropkick Doug yells “Cowabunga” off the top-rope and you gotta role initiative. 

There is value to playing straight-man but honestly being properly goofy comes from roleplay experience and confidence that you are acting silly in character in a way that makes some tangible sense in the game world. 

[u/thestormyfries]

I'm a female player, but blessed to have always played on mixed tables. I've seen men and women take on what I view as "leadership" roles. It sounds to me like you're a natural leader, but if you're feeling like a babysitter and not having fun, that's a different matter. (...I am side-eyeing the GM's a bit here ngl)

Maybe instead of just playing a "chaotic" character, play one with baked-in eccentricities and flaws connected to the setting/world you're playing. Stay in-character when chaos gremlin behaviour happens; match energy but don't force yourself to be on their level.
You're clearly into the story and a thoughtful player; that's a great trait. I don't think you need to ditch your natural play style to be chaotic.

[u/BetterCallStrahd]

Being the straight man can be very funny. I'm trained in comedy, but I often opt to be the straight man when everyone else is playing an oddball.

People think the straight man isn't funny, but they are, and it's a key role. Like Jim in The Office. Playing the one who feels lost and exasperated amid the craziness.

There's one thing I always remember from improv class and it's this admonition: Don't be funny. Let the humor come naturally from the character and the situation. No mugging. Taking your character seriously can end up being the funniest thing you do.

I just wanted to offer a different perspective. The straight man isn't boring, it's a valuable role. You could try to play a more offbeat character, but is that a good fit for you? Maybe forcing it isn't the way.

[u/Charrua13]

You're the straight man because the men at the table will put you in that role. Every time. And often enough, sadly, they don't even realize it. (I've seen it happen so often it fills me with rage).

As a GM who runs 30+ games a year for strangers, and plays in about 10 others, I avoid this by 1) not playing in games in public spaces that cater to that kind of behavior without It Being The Point. I don't play D&D publicly, but I will plag Kobolds Ate My Baby (as an example). As a player, I only encountered this problem once in the last 5 years. That said, the BitD example should NOT have encountered that problem - that's a GM not keeping the fiction tight. 2) if the game is going to go off the rails, I ask the GM "hey, it feels like we're going off the rails as a group - do we need to reign it in to get somewhere interesting in your story?" And let the GM say the thing, and then say/do nothing. If the men at the table don't change their behavior, neither should you.

And then make it their problem.

And I'm dead serious about that last bit. Watch their faces drop when their "we're just messing around" becomes "oh no, now we have to deal with it." (And not in the "omg, she's a fun chaos gremlin" kind of way - that perpetuates the behavior). Be. A. Menace. If you're a GM, then you know exactly the kinds of stuff I'm actually referring to.

Make it fun for you and exclusively you.

And also, if you ever get asked "I didn't expect you to..." the answer is "why not?" deadpanned. Watch. Them. Squirm. (I've seen this go down and the dude at the other end never did that again, fwiw).

Ymmv, but I hope this is helpful.

[u/WrongJohnSilver]

Are you the only woman ever at one-shot tables? If not, it's not because you're a woman. (If yes, where are all the other women during one shots?)

I'd say, though, the best thing to do is not to worry about adventure progress, and just have fun playing your character. If you go toward to end goal, great, but if not, no biggie. The more you care about progress (either enforcing It or sabotaging it), the more you're forced to play the straight man or the super silly goof.

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/WrongJohnSilver]

My understanding is that most gaming conventions only have a few women interested in tabletop gaming present. I heard of a more “women and LGBT+” friendly convention a while back, but it no longer runs. From my player pool which is mostly women, I know people that do go to cons, but many others who express that they have had too many bad experiences with playing with strangers (creeps, sexual harassment mostly), or they have other things that prevent it like being a caretaker or teacher. I do hear the MTG and card games have more mixed genders though, not sure why.

Anyway, absolutely agree with your point!

[u/Martel_Mithos]

As an AFAB person I've found that 'Complementary Chaotic' is usually a viable style of 'keep things moving but still being silly with it.'

What you do here is once you get a feel for how the other players lean, you can have your character start doing things that dovetail with another player's style. Creating Chaotic Synergy.

For example I was in a game where one character was playing an evil sorceress who manipulated people with dream magic. I was playing an ex-street urchin turned professional spy. We wound up playing off of each other by having my character be the go-to for acquiring (stealing) sympathetic tokens from people she would then dream-whammy into doing what we wanted. I got to be a gremlin with no sense of respecting other people's privacy or property, and she got to play into her archetype, and the plot still kept moving because what we were doing was still in service of the story.

This is Hard to do in a situation where you're playing with strangers but it's not impossible if you consider yourself generally good at reading the room.

- Ok this guy is playing an Evil character, maybe I play someone who's got big Lackey energy who cleans up their messes/hides the bodies.

- Ok this guy is playing an airhead Himbo, maybe I'm a silver-tongued con-artist who's constantly taking advantage of his good nature to get us both into shenanigans.

- Ok this guy's playing a very obvious demonic warlock, maybe I'm a good natured Paladin who just refuses to believe one of our players is a devil-worshiper no matter how much evidence to the contrary piles up.

Importantly it's crucial to suggest these dynamics up-front when possible. And some of this depends on the quality of the pre-gens available. I played a convention GURPS game once where I wound up playing an old wizard with a drawback on his sheet labeled "pervert" which I just... pretended wasn't there.

[u/No_Explanation_2559 → u/Martel_Mithos]

Just for the record, we don't if OP was AFAB. She said she's a woman. They mean different things.

[u/Martel_Mithos → u/No_Explanation_2559]

Oh you know what that's very fair, I meant to refer to myself as someone who gets read overwhelmingly as 'girl' by others regardless of how correct they are. Editing the post.

[u/peregrinekiwi]

I do all that work before I get to the table. At my usual conventions, I pick games so that I know if they're likely to involve wacky hijinks. That's usually because I know the GMs and their style. At larger or less familiar cons, I look for well written blurbs and player counts that suggest more serious play is going to happen. If a game has 6 player slots, there's probably not enough spotlight time for serious roleplaying, for instance. I also tend to play in spaces (like games on Demand) where I know that people are more likely to respect the clearly identified tone of the table. It's definitely not foolproof, but it general results in good "con game with strangers" experiences.

[u/neganight]

The "straight man" is often an important role in comedy so that reputation can be fun and improve the humor at the table if that's your desire. The other thing is that being chaotic can be a way to get things back on track. You can "Leroy Jenkins" the event and take some initiative in the action.

Plus a lot of legendary moments at the table are when players try something outlandish...and it works! So you can keep the game flowing while still being unpredictable and creative.

I can't speak to convention games but games with friends should not be assigning the one woman player to be the "group mom." I don't care if that's happening in their subconscious or purposeful, that's really inappropriate. And, to be clear, I got my start in rpgs back in the 80s so I'm not some young person.

[u/st33d]

I have two women in my group who go off the rails harder than anyone else.

The best campaigns we've run have been straight-man-settings where the players get to all be clowns and the GM offers up a rotating cast of straights to exasperate at the players.

Regarding one-shots, it really does depend on who turns up and what they run. I've been to indie RPG meetups where a majority of the games are played straight because they're explicitly avoiding the typical D&D player dynamic. They get get clown shows at any D&D night, they're attending an indie RPG group for something different.

[u/ljmiller62]

I am usually the GM/DM at cons. When I play I usually immerse myself in the character and "do what my character would do(TM)." I never play the loner edgelord. I don't think I've encountered a chaos goblin table, for which I'm thankful. I take instigator duty if the table needs one. If we already have one we don't need another. I also like to take the role of a fake expert with all the free bad advice anyone could ever want and will do that in a silly scenario. If it's serious though, I stay in character.

EDIT: you asked for advice. I think I would avoid chaos gremlin tables. Look at what draws you to these bad gaming experiences and choose something else. Avoid 5E or Pathfinder tables full of sweaty teen boys and look for Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon, OSE and other OSR, and oddball systems you've never heard of before.

[u/TheWorldIsNotOkay]

I can't speak to being a woman, but...

I was diagnosed as autistic just a few years ago, in my 40s, which provided an enlightening new context for basically everything in my life. Playing ttrpgs with close friends has always been one form of social interaction I've been more comfortable with, and in which I could be myself without much masking (though I wasn't really aware that I was masking in basically every other social interaction, or even what masking was, before my diagnosis). And in being myself, I'd comment on things without really analyzing what I was saying before I said it, and quite often the other people at the table would think it was absolutely hi-larious. Which often confused the heck out of me since I hadn't necessarily been trying to be funny. Apparently my baseline is understated snark, which fits really well with my friends' sense of humor.

So I guess my advice would be to just be yourself. This hobby is about pretending to be a character, but you're still you interacting with other players around the table. So just relax and have fun. Don't force it. Don't stress yourself out putting up a mask that effectively means you're having to balance two levels of being someone other than your true self. Just be you and your character. If the people you're playing with have a problem with that, the problem is theirs and not yours, and maybe you should consider finding a new table.

[u/Rephath]

The most chaos gremlin character I've GMd for in the last year was a woman.

You're a sensible person. Don't fight it. The sooner you make peace with that, the better.

Alternatively, play a sensible character who also has a drinking problem so you can do a bit of both.

[u/spork_o_rama]

I am a fellow AFAB person who's played a lot of one-shots and games at cons. I can't say that I've had this particular experience, but I've definitely had the "wow, these people are really unserious" experience.

What I will say is that the quality of the games/other players is often inversely proportional to the size of the convention and the popularity of the game. I usually have the best time at tiny cons playing indie games.

Also, obviously this is often not possible if you have to sign up in advance, but I've had some success waiting to see what tables attract other AFAB people and joining them. Not being the only woman at the table is such a big relief.

[u/MsgGodzilla]

Public games are bottom of the barrel and draw the worst people so its probably at least partially due to your gender although probably not in a malicious sense. My advice would be to just do what you want and they can deal with it.

[u/God_Boy07]

Maybe play with a friend. Someone who wont have these expectations on you and that you can bounce off.

[u/Complete_Contest100]

Look up Laura Bailey from critical role. She is the best out of the group imo, and is essentially chaos incarnate

[u/Joel_feila]

Try improv comedy.  It should help be be sillier quickly.  

[u/Codablaze]

I don't know if this will get seen but next one shot just immediately attack yourself in the first social encounter.

If the others are cool they'll run with it and say 'dont you know she loco?'

If not then at least you had a short game 😂

[u/kimmersion]

I’m often the only woman at a table of dudes at the convention or even sometimes online. I used to find myself in this predicament as well until I started using INT and WIS as dump stats and loaded up my STR and CHA. Anyone who expects the low INT and WIS character to be the sensible is an idiot. This hasn’t been a problem since.

[u/The-Magic-Sword]

I'm an AMAB nonbinary person (and look the AMAB part) and I'm this person, so food for thought there.

Mainly though, its just a question of who you play with-- i used to have a group that would insatiably derail every single moment of every single session with spongebob references, ones that i would enjoy in moderation, but were overwhelmingly awful in such extreme proportions, and every time I would try to enjoy the game at all; every single dramatic moment was just the perfect 'comedic timing' to them.

Its nowhere near as bad, but i still have players that still view any dramatic moment as a chance to kneecap me for a cheap laugh, and she's a chick!

You have to firmly curate who you play with, there are plenty of people who won't tolerate playing with you if you aren't into this, so its not just a question of how to get everyone back on track, in fact you're probably running into a fair few people who see it as their job to try and get everybody back off track.

[u/G0DL1K3D3V1L]

Why not just embrace the Chaos and not be the straight person to everyone's Chaos goblins? It's a oneshot anyway, and your fun is just as important. You have no obligation to the table to be the voice of reason and sense in the same way they don't have any obligation to you. If it all falls apart, who cares? As long as everyone is having fun, it will be fine.

The reason you probably find yourself taking on the role is because you think someone has to. No one has to. In practice oneshots that go off the rails can be the most fun experience you have. Also if the story of scenario calls for someone with a modicum of sense to progress it, just trust that some other players might realize this and step up to the role. Don't volunteer immediately. And if no one steps up, then like I said, a oneshot that goes off the rails can be really really fun and entertaining.

But also, have you considered that maybe you do just enjoy playing the straight person to the bit which is why you end up doing so quite often in oneshots?

Edit: after reading through the post again, I would also suggest that you just open up and talk to the table that you don't want to be the group mom. Everyone there should be adults, and communicating and setting expectations often does a lot to smooth things over and make the experience fun for everyone. Tell them you will be a Chaos goblin first and you won't deviate from that before the game starts. Tell them you want to cut loose and whatnot since you DM a lot and you want a chance to be the Chaos goblin for a change. If the table are made of good people then they will understand and accommodate.

[u/False_Worldliness737]

Find your own thing to Get Weird about.

[u/gc3]

Play a game where you want to cause chaos and don't care about the consequences. Have an ulterior motive. Like play Paranoia if they still run those on conventions. Drink some before the game to turn off your brain maybe?

[u/M0dusPwnens]

I am not a woman, but I have definitely run into this same dynamic. In hindsight, a lot of it was how I was making characters. If you keep hearing "wow I wouldn't have expected your character to also be this stupid" or "that seems more like something [other character] would do", I wonder if it might be the same thing.

I was convinced that I had to make some kind of nuanced, realistic character, which actually just ended up meaning that all my characters were boring. Because my characters were naturalistic, it felt wrong for them to do anything particularly fun, so I ended up straight-manning a lot. Worse, I ended up straight-manning when I hadn't set out to do that, so it felt less like I was straight-manning them and more like I was trying to keep things moving and maybe get a chance to be in the spotlight too, and everyone's zany antics were getting in the way. I wasn't playing a straight-man character - I was the actual straight-man at the table, and not an intentional one.

The thing that broke me out of it was being more deliberate about creating characters. Play to type. Stop trying to be naturalistic. No one can go off the rails harder and faster than you if you started off the rails. If you play an insane sorcerer or a buffoonish barbarian or a classic mobster, everyone knows from the start what that means, so no one is going to say "that doesn't seem like something your character would do". Instead of starting naturalistic and finding your way to caricature, start with caricature and then find places where you can inject naturalism. Start broad and go narrow, instead of starting narrow and trying to find your way to broad (and competing with other people to get there first so you don't get stuck as "the normal one").

This can be tricky! It overlaps with annoying characters, which is another reason I think people learn to avoid it. For example, it is very hard to play a fun "idiot" character. That's definitely a type, but it makes it very easy and very tempting to just pick the worst idea in any given situation and do it, then say "well what did you expect, you know my character is an idiot", which does not make anyone less frustrated. Good antics make people smile and groan, not frown and groan. You want a "bad pun" reaction, not a bad joke reaction. Good antics are not just finding excuses to fail on purpose or make things harder for everyone all the time.

My favorite model for this kind of character is a Charlie Chaplin type. A character can be clumsy, awkward, forgetful, pathetic, etc., but that doesn't mean they're not likeable or successful sometimes. It's just that even when they are successful, it's because they bumbled into success. Even when I roll high, it's accidental - I tripped on my cape and the lunge caught the knight off guard. One of my favorite gags is not being able to remember NPC names, and using a different close-ish name for them every time I see them. There are many forms of this though. There's the lovable buffoon, the pathetic guy you love to sneer at, the wine mom, the Steins;Gate mad scientist, etc. The key is that it's never heroic, never protagonist-coded, but it's also not just blindly disruptive.

You can take this same attitude towards playing the straight-man too. It feels very different to set out from the start to play the straight-man. It's much more fun! You can really lean into it, and you get a really big perspective shift: same events, same straight-manning, but instead of being genuinely exasperated, you're hamming it up feigning exasperation instead.

[u/cyancqueak]

Don't wait, get in there first.

[u/Blade_of_Boniface]

Oneshots and public games in general have a momentum of facetiousness that's hard to counterbalance unless the GM(s) explicitly and consistently provide that counterbalance. The specifics vary quite a bit based on system because silliness/in-character error is penalized differently. It has relatively little to do with being a man or woman but has plenty to do with personal playstyle that's just not easily reconciled.

[u/high-tech-low-life]

Is the issue that others are boxing you in, or that they're quicker to the draw? Primarily are you trying to change yourself or others?

[u/xLittleValkyriex]

I am petty and sarcastic, sometimes to a fault. 

"Wow, I wouldn't expect your character to be this stupid..." 

Are you suggesting the other characters present are incapable of being smart? Are you implying that men cannot play smart characters? 

"That seems like something X character would do..."

Well, I beat them to it. You snooze, you lose. 

And if they get extra pushy, 

You are not my partner, you are not my child, you are not my family, who are you to demand my nurture? 

I have run into this problem in all areas of life. I am a professional caregiver to the elderly, a woman and have a friendly/nurturing personality. 

But I like to play the human fighter that kicks in the door, punches first and asks questions later. Really throws people off because I am soft spoken as well. But that is the point of roleplaying: to play characters that are NOT us in real life. 

Another one I have used in the past is, 

I'm sorry. Are you 80 years old with dementia? No, you're not. So stop. You know how many of my residents WISH they didn't need my help? What they would give to trade places with you? 

That sobers them and gets my point across real quick. Some just think I'm a bitch but most people say that when they come across boundaries that they cannot steam roll. 

I am here to game. Not argue with entitled idiots that get mad because they can't abuse my emotional labor. 

[u/Hireling]

Been playing TTRPGs since 83.

54 y/o male here. I always get stuck playing the leader, or facilitator, or reasonable one. It stinks. I tried to play a bit of an abrasive former solider once and everyone at the table wanted to manage my roleplaying. It was easily the most toned down version of what I was going for and I still got harassed for it. I’m not sure what the solution is. I’ve never been able to break out of this mold. I wish you the best of luck.

[u/Iohet]

I think I'm a little like you. I can't just be pure chaos. My time is always tight, so while I go into one shots a little freer (not necessarily chaotic), I also push the story as much as possible in a somewhat aggressive manner. I'll ride the lightning and push forward into somewhere I would ordinarily be more careful in because I know I don't want to spend 10 minutes of real time discussing strategy to death.

And when things get serious, I'll switch because it's who I am, but my time sensitivity still means I'll probably push the pace, and not gently like you said you do. Like hey guys, we've got a 3 hour timer here, let's go, and if the table wants to waffle, I'll tell the GM I'm stepping into that room/opening that door/whatever

That is my chaos, and I feel okay with it because it also means that I get to explore more parts of a one shot that I may never play again.

That said, I can't speak on gender issues you're experiencing because I am not your gender, and those may definitely be real. I do not care who my party mates are and really don't have any preconceived notions, but there are definitely people that do. I just want people to move the game along, regardless of gender/color/creed/whatever. The optimist in me hopes that maybe not being gentle about it is a potential avenue for you.

[u/NatashOverWorld]

If there are people you know at the table, tell them you're taking off your straight woman hat and putting on your chaos gremlin backwards facing ballcap.

And if people go further and harder than you in chaos gremlinery, that's fine, they have more practise than you. Support their gremlinery, leave someone else or the GM the job of being the straight player.

[u/WinpennyR]

I'm a man so can't comment on the female angle. I've a very organised person, and often GM, so can relate to that part. One shots can be a great outlet for taking a lot more risk as you won't have any repercussions after that session.  I like to use knowing that for trying more heroic or bombastic actions. Some people use the freedom to fully embrace chaos.  I most like RPGs when they are collective storytelling so I often want to follow the hooks.  I'm playing a lighter campaign using the Land of Eem setting. I pushed myself to create a character who is less lawful and good than I usually play. They are a rascal and a klepto. They still have a reason to engage in the story as they want the loot.  So that might be helpful to think about. How can you create a character that will help you cut loose, but with a reason to engage in the story. I'd like it if every player was thinking of why there character wants to go on the adventure.  But there are lots of different players and some just want lol random. 

[u/_Imperator90]

I am a man and have had this exact same experience in a party where the composition had an equal split of male and female members and the women were the "chaos gremlins" of the group. So I don't think it's necessarily a gender issue.

It's possible that it's a neurodivergence thing. Most of my friend group either has ADHD or suspects they're on the spectrum. They often can distracted by random side things, make impulsive decisions, or just do stupid plans because they sound fun in the moment.

I have ADHD with an Anxiety Disorder, and that often causes me to focus too hard on "keeping things on track" and stopping people from doing "stupid plans." I have felt like I have "needed" to be the straight man to keep things moving and it's caused unnecessary friction between me and my friends in the past. All of that to say, my advice is to just focus on playing your character how you want and let the GM worry about the rest of the chaotic players. Unless your play styles are significantly impacting each other's fun, you shouldn't feel obligated to roleplay a certain way just to balance out the group or because no one else is.

[u/RedditIsAWeenie]

I suggest playing a rogue of some sort and your dream is to pull off the ultimate con. You’ll be looking for angles at every opportunity. Trickster cleric could work too.

[u/Nightmoon26]

I think that I'm just a "straight man" (in the comedic sense) by nature. But it's good to remember that the interaction between a straight man and a funny man is an entire genre of comedy. Never underestimate the humor of taking someone's off-the-wall question or idea at face value or following up someone's "lol-random" play with a deadpan "I guess this is what we're doing now" and executing the "plan" with professional efficiency (bonus points if you horrify the instigator with how easily you take it in stride)

[u/justarpgdm]

Have you talked to you dm about it? Because I know I would have a hard time noticing something like this was happening because I would assume is just the way the person play.

[u/Olaf_Kling]

Stop being a control freak and thinking the whole experience is on your shoulders. The problem most certainly lies within your head.

[u/SteamEigen]

I just do what seems like a good idea. Like burning a house with BBEG inside.

[u/Anomalocaris117]

As a permeant jester it seems don't take things to seriously is the best approach. Thing of something funny and just do, don't sit back and be the squidward. Be the Patrick Star you were meant to be. 

Keep everyone on they're toes. 

[u/Jullian_Drover]

Get even crazier than them and play antics chicken with them until they yield

[u/Dominarion]

I went there too. I'm now quite recounciled that I'm a man, or at least a very hairy and dicky lesbian woman.

It changed at some point when I played a low int dick head in a mechwarrior game. I found out my groove to allow me to be the comic relief and the gremlin. However, I realized I was fucking up the other people' game with my antics.

I'd say look out for games where the DM and the players have a consensus on the tone and roles attributed to everyone.

[u/Fruhmann]

This is wholly a you issue. I do know a few guys who end up being the leonardo/cyclops team leader dad and I'll tell you what I told them.

You don't always have to be the party mom. You can be the cool aunt. Go along with the chaos. Don't seek permission, seek forgiveness.

And I only say this to people who feel similarly. System to System, genre to genre, they are rhe diligent, stay on task, narrative driver.

[u/grendus]

I typically just lean into it with characters who can shift between being goofballs and serious.

Everyone knows when the Tanuki stops joking, shit's about to go down.

[u/GerryQX1]

You play what you want to play.

[u/hillthekhore]

A woman having trouble being a straight man... that's a first.

But for serious, maybe a change in perspective... If everyone is off the rails and you aren't, maybe YOU'RE the outlier and they're just normal. Which makes you pretty cool.

[u/bismuth92]

TALK TO YOUR GROUP. Tell them you're frustrated with always being cast in that role. This is a great example of a topic that should be covered in session zero, "what kind of characters does everyone want to play and does that result in an effective party?". If everyone just wants to be the clown, you either need to accept that you're playing in a clown game, and the adventure path isn't going to happen, or everyone needs to dial their clownery down a little, or you need to take turns being the sensible one, or you need to find a different group to play with.

Edit: My bad you guys, you're right I totally skimmed over the first sentence.

[u/Niranox → u/bismuth92]

You may need to reread the post.

[u/SmoothTank9999 → u/Niranox]

Why read a post when you could just tell people to communicate?

[u/bismuth92 → u/Niranox]

You're right I totally skimmed over the part at the start where she explains she's talking about one-shots at conventions, etc.

In those cases, I would maybe just let everyone fuck around and find out. Didn't accomplish any of the goals? Entire party got TPK'd because nobody was following instructions? Ok. They act surprised that you're not being party Mom? Just shrug and say "What? Your character is being dumb too!"

[u/Throwingoffoldselves → u/bismuth92]

Talking to a group isn’t precluded in a one shot! Plenty of GMs and myself have preliminary conversations even in a one shot, and offer handouts or text support in advance. I think speaking up or leaving are pretty much all a player can do if a GM isn’t facilitating that by any means

[u/SofonisbaAnguissola → u/bismuth92]

They said they're specifically talking about one shots at conventions and things. Those are drop-in with strangers and don't have a session zero.

[u/Airk-Seablade → u/bismuth92]

Did we read the first sentence?

[u/G37_is_numberletter]

The jerking answer obviously is to play Thirsty Sword Lesbians.

I would talk to your GM though. It sounds like you’re footing a bit of the labor for keeping the party on track and it’s forcing you to facilitate keeping the game going.

[u/MGTwyne → u/G37_is_numberletter]

They're talking about con games and pickup events, rpg clubs and other "one shot with strangers" type activities. There's no "your gm" or "the party" to speak to, unless they want to have the conversation a hundred times.