Regarding your actual request:
The "that is what my character would do" argument is hard to refute as it is his character after all. You should not control his character After all you control the whole universe. I have had many players pull this on me.
His characters have good behavior up until he loses so I would just have a deity who sometimes reverses wrongful deaths. If he kills a PC that PC immediately comes back to life.
To set it up I would have a wronged PC be so taken back by his death that he ascends to being a deity(NPC). That deity is the one that saves all the other PC's from wrongful deaths.
I wouldn't like to play in a setting in which random dead people can become deities for fun.
1. My players are trapped somewhere, surrounded by an army of mages, soldiers and knights. The problem player will do ANYTHING to try and escape and he will actually get angry OOC because he failed to escape
Well now, is this a common occurrence? Why are they smack dab in the middle of a hostile army? If you're planting the PC there regularly with the army trying to get them to do something it sounds like railroading: where you're forcing the party into action. Its not the best DMing tactic, and players aren't doing anything wrong if they get upset by it or try to go around it.
defeat or outwit an entire army by himself while his halfling rogue is level 5. Everytime his character gets defeated, caught, slain or even when his plans fail, as dire as the situation could be, he'll be pissed in and out of the game. He'll actually start being mean to the other players and me (GM) because his character or the dice failed, even if what he tried to do was completely desperate and stupid. I remember him being angry after charging alone towards four enemies at once at beginner-level and being defeated in Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, after being warned several times that in this game, two enemies could easily take you down.
That needs a smack in the head, particularly if he's playing a rogue. A rogue, alone, isn't going to have an easy time with anything.
2. When he's pissed, he becomes mean and his only desire is now to take revenge in game. That's right : he'll do anything to kill the NPC (or PC!) who defeated him or made him fail.
That's not wrong or unusual either. If someone kidnaped me, killed me, or beat the snot out of me and threw me in jail i'd want to smack them around in return as well.
Has he ever had to GM or Co-GM? I've found sometimes problem players with "A Winner is Me" syndrome can be helped by taking the GM seat and being forced to loose all the time... after all that's what we GMs do... loose battles/schemes/objective/characters all the time. We have to loose with grace. :P
On the roleplaying side, I like a Mask metaphor...
http://www.richardhenzel.com/maskworkshp.htm (I did not actually attend)
It's what let's me play evil self indulgent ass-hats on occasion. While don't have a litteral mask I do put one on when in character. With the occasional lift to give the audience (other players) a wink or make comments like "is this 'toon' a total B-tard".
It really sounds like your player is playing himself. As he keeps playing the same characters over and over again. I used to that early on, play myself, more then create a totally different character. Let him read up on mask acting and see if the concept will help him improve both his attitude and this roleplay.
It's also not an attitude that requires therapy.
So you say. Here are the parts of the original post that I was reacting to:
"he can sometimes ruin everyone's fun, especially his own."
"he'll be pissed in and out of the game. He'll actually start being mean to the other players and me (GM)"
"When he's pissed, he becomes mean"
"he's always the one going out of the party's way, slowing the whole game down"
"he says "Well I hate losing! What can I do about it?""
Nah.... no problem here. Go about your business. Move along....
There's this guy I've been playing with for about eight years. He's a nice guy, but he hates losing, whatever the game is. To be honest, his roleplaying isn't very impressive either, but he's a fun person to have around and he can often contribute well to a gaming table. Still, he hates losing.
He hates losing so much, it affects his actions in the game. All the time. I just realised once more how much it could kill everyone's fun and I'm asking you for advice on how to take care of this problem, because he can sometimes ruin everyone's fun, especially his own.
So there it is : this guy plays just about anything, but every single character he plays suddenly becomes agressive. And remember, he hates losing ...
I will be the third person to point something out here, something you needed to say to him right at the beginning 8 years ago:
"Dude, seriously, the only way to 'lose' at D&D is to die, and even that doesn't count if you had fun. If you don't want to 'lose' you need to pick your battles carefully and fight them smarter, and even then the God of Dice can give you a severely bad day. So play for the long game, not the next encounter. It's not 'losing' to realise that your first level fighter can't beat the troll, it's 'winning' to find a way not to have to; it's not 'losing' to work out that the four guards can make your first level wizard mince, it's a 'setback' that he has to get around. If you fulfilled your quest at the end of the day in spite of the odds, you can say you 'won', and that's the only yardstick that counts."
Your player is also WAY to competitive, and frankly it sounds like the rest of your players need to learn the lessons of consequences. The next time he gets in over his head and starts on about revenge, just explain that:
"Your inability to make wise tactical decisions is not the responsibility of the people you attacked. You should concentrate less on winning the battle and more on winning the war."
Edit:
I will add that in thirty years of DMing, it's a really bad idea to put players in a no-win situation, that always annoys them, even the best players, as does taking or breaking their stuff (at least if you do it too often).
Perhaps the best kind of game for this player is a revenge-oriented campaign. The BBEG begins the game wronging, or having wronged, the PCs. All of them are united in wanting to get revenge on him. Curse of the Crimson Throne starts off this way, and it's a cool way to unite a party and in this case, tap into the player's psyche.
|
What you can do is actually have some real world consequences to his real world actions. When he starts his fit tell him once that if he continues the the session is over for the day. The second time he does it, pack up your books and tell everyone that you will continue next time.
Do this every time. Let him know that you are not going to continue to play a game where you are supposed to be having fun with your friends if your friends aren't having fun. Obviously he isn't having fun at that point and his continued frustration only drains the fun from everyone.
Don't play another game at that point. Pop a light-hearted movie in the DVD player or check out NetFlix. Go do something else. Whatever it is, it should not be another game. His frustration will carry over.
Later on, pull him aside and let him know that this is how you are going to run things. Tell him that his actions are making the game less fun for everyone. He needs to focus on changing or he will be asked to not game with you anymore. You two can still do all kinds of other things but gaming would not be one of them.
I have a few friends that I don't game with but we still hang out and do other things. Our friendship isn't hurt by this because we are good friends.
+1 to all of this, though I'd tell him that after a second outburst, he wouldn't be invited back to the game. After that, I'd tell him that I would be willing to hang out with him, but not in contexts that would allow him to have these fits, meaning no gaming.
Just because he acknowledges that he hates losing doesn't mean that everyone else should be forced to tolerate his tantrums.
I wouldn't like to play in a setting in which random dead people can become deities for fun.Regarding your actual request:
The "that is what my character would do" argument is hard to refute as it is his character after all. You should not control his character After all you control the whole universe. I have had many players pull this on me.
His characters have good behavior up until he loses so I would just have a deity who sometimes reverses wrongful deaths. If he kills a PC that PC immediately comes back to life.
To set it up I would have a wronged PC be so taken back by his death that he ascends to being a deity(NPC). That deity is the one that saves all the other PC's from wrongful deaths.
I am not saying random people become deities. The point was that once the "mad player" kills a PC any other attempt to kill PC's will be thwarted by the DM. The PC becoming a deity(NPC controlled by the DM) part is just fluff. I don't want other players dying because someone decides to act like a little kid so the real reason(out of character) the "deity" exist is to stop the player from killing the other PC's just because he wants to be a jerk.
He can walk away from the table until the cools down, but being a jerk is not an option. At least killing other PC's for not reason is not an option anyway.
I am not saying random people become deities. The point was that once the "mad player" kills a PC any other attempt to kill PC's will be thwarted by the DM. The PC becoming a deity(NPC controlled by the DM) part is just fluff. I don't want other players dying because someone decides to act like a little kid so the real reason(out of character) the "deity" exist is to stop the player from killing the other PC's just because he wants to be a jerk.
He can walk away from the table until the cools down, but being a jerk is not an option. At least killing other PC's for not reason is not an option anyway.
If this works for you, more power to you. Being a GM is a difficult job and players with behavior problems are adding to an already difficult burden. I have never had to eject a player, but that's in part because I am extremely selective about who joins our group. We have been very lucky and the worst problems I've had to deal with so far have been power gamers and lackadaisical players. I've not yet had anyone throw dice at my table.
But if I did, that person would be immediately ejected from the game and would only be invited back if they demonstrated some serious growing up. I don't have time enough in my life to waste with trying to be a nursery school recess monitor.
I am not saying random people become deities. The point was that once the "mad player" kills a PC any other attempt to kill PC's will be thwarted by the DM. The PC becoming a deity(NPC controlled by the DM) part is just fluff. I don't want other players dying because someone decides to act like a little kid so the real reason(out of character) the "deity" exist is to stop the player from killing the other PC's just because he wants to be a jerk.
He can walk away from the table until the cools down, but being a jerk is not an option. At least killing other PC's for not reason is not an option anyway.If this works for you, more power to you. Being a GM is a difficult job and players with behavior problems are adding to an already difficult burden. I have never had to eject a player, but that's in part because I am extremely selective about who joins our group. We have been very lucky and the worst problems I've had to deal with so far have been power gamers and lackadaisical players. I've not yet had anyone throw dice at my table.
But if I did, that person would be immediately ejected from the game and would only be invited back if they demonstrated some serious growing up. I don't have time enough in my life to waste with trying to be a nursery school recess monitor.
I would most likely eject them too, but since the OP is friends with the trouble maker I don't think that is an option for him. He should at least however protect the other players from the problem player.
|
|
You should make sure that he's really this way, and that people (especially you) are not projecting this onto him.
If you truly believe this is a problem and other agree, you need to talk to him or even show him this very thread.
Pathfinder is not something to lose a good friend over. It's very possible to end the Pathfinder relationship, but still hang out with him in other ways.
Try to make sure before acting. Having problem read about their problems often works better than explaining it by voice.
Yea most threads of this type usually boil down to "I have a player who is a gigantic jerk but I cannot kick him out of the game."
Kicking someone out is usually the best solution. That usually wakes them up or at least removes the problem and increases the group's fun.
It might be the best solution, but it's not always the most practical solution. Sometimes it is more practical to "reform" a player than to dump him and find a new player. For instance, if he's the GM's source of transportation, he might not be replaceable.
|
"... but he's a fun person to have around and he can often contribute well to a gaming table...'
You contradict yourself later in the post - he's so much 'fun' and then becomes aggresive. I've seen this a few times in all my years of RP'ing and in real life as my youngest son Loves To Win and Hates To Lose (to paraphrase Babylon 5) but he is slowly learning...
You say he doesn't need anger management but I disagree - there MAY BE a deep rooted problem here, I'm not saying there is. May be he feels in a RPG he has a measure of control that he doesn't have in the real world and then when he loses, that degree of control is lost. Personally, as a player i would look for another group not turn into him and say it's me or him. As a GM I would say enough is enough and disband the group for a bit, then reform without telling him - Immature? yes. Reasonable? yes. Pandering to one player? No.
The thing that tends to get lost in these discussions is the other players around the table. Everyone wants to talk about the GM or the problem player. But that's only a side issue. The real issue is that four or five other people who know how to act like adults are having their fun ruined by one person who is channeling a two year old brat.
One of my main mantras in life, both in my personal life and in my life as a manager in the business world, is that if you reward the wrong behavior, you will reinforce it.
Let's say you have five players and this one is being a jerk. You don't want to eject him because that's mean or something. Now you are telling the group that you accept that sort of behavior. Let's say it's worse, let's say that you start accommodating that problem player by, for example, not killing his player but retconning the encounter so that somehow he survives the encounter. Now you are not merely ACCEPTING that behavior, you are in fact REWARDING it. That message gets sent to the whole group. Hopefully the rest of your group is adult enough to know better than to act like that themselves, but if not.... you've just potentially elevated an otherwise good player to another problem player. After all why should problem player 1 get all the rewards?
This is not about one player. It's about group dynamics and reinforcing behavior. The longer you accept this behavior, the more you are ingraining it into your social dynamic.
That's the bottom line.
We had a problem player a while back. I think you need to talk to him and remind him that there is no betting Pathfinder. You can't expect every scenario to be one that you win. Sometimes you have to run away, get captured, die. It's just the way of the game.
It might be the best solution, but it's not always the most practical solution. Sometimes it is more practical to "reform" a player than to dump him and find a new player. For instance, if he's the GM's source of transportation, he might not be replaceable.Yea most threads of this type usually boil down to "I have a player who is a gigantic jerk but I cannot kick him out of the game."
Kicking someone out is usually the best solution. That usually wakes them up or at least removes the problem and increases the group's fun.
This is the thing - the guy isn't being a total jerk, he's exhibiting a lack of tactical thinking combined with an obsession with holding a grudge when he makes bad decisions. It's actually as if he's trying to absolve himself of making the bad decision by transferring the responsibility for being beaten onto them instead of taking it on board and learning from it.
Him: "I'm going to get revenge on those guards!"
DM: "Yeah, because guards absolutely should not defend themselves when attacked by a random maniac ... no, wait, they should! Hmm. Maybe you shouldn't go around attacking squads of guards, how about that for a solution instead?"
If you can convince him that he should think before he acts and that being beaten in one fight does not constitute 'losing' in the long run, and that other people are not responsible for his bad decisions, then problem solved.
|
My answer earlier was tongue-in-cheek, but on a serious note, you as the DM have to decide if this is disruptive to your game. You can't play favorites at the game table, because it is your responsibility to make sure everyone there has equal opportunity to have fun. If this guy is killing the fun for the rest of your players, friend or no, you need to tell him to shape up or ship out. The other players don't owe it to that one player to suffer through his behavior week in and week out.
What you can do is actually have some real world consequences to his real world actions. When he starts his fit tell him once that if he continues the the session is over for the day. The second time he does it, pack up your books and tell everyone that you will continue next time.
Do this every time. Let him know that you are not going to continue to play a game where you are supposed to be having fun with your friends if your friends aren't having fun. Obviously he isn't having fun at that point and his continued frustration only drains the fun from everyone.
Don't play another game at that point. Pop a light-hearted movie in the DVD player or check out NetFlix. Go do something else. Whatever it is, it should not be another game. His frustration will carry over.
Later on, pull him aside and let him know that this is how you are going to run things. Tell him that his actions are making the game less fun for everyone. He needs to focus on changing or he will be asked to not game with you anymore. You two can still do all kinds of other things but gaming would not be one of them.
I have a few friends that I don't game with but we still hang out and do other things. Our friendship isn't hurt by this because we are good friends.
I like this plan.
The thing that tends to get lost in these discussions is the other players around the table. Everyone wants to talk about the GM or the problem player. But that's only a side issue. The real issue is that four or five other people who know how to act like adults are having their fun ruined by one person who is channeling a two year old brat.
One of my main mantras in life, both in my personal life and in my life as a manager in the business world, is that if you reward the wrong behavior, you will reinforce it.
[...]
This is not about one player. It's about group dynamics and reinforcing behavior. The longer you accept this behavior, the more you are ingraining it into your social dynamic.
That's the bottom line.
Very much, this. Honestly, does this problem player play videogames? Do they get similarly incensed in multiplayer, or are they conspicuously conscious of their "sore loser" tendencies to avoid playing them altogether? The problem is not likely to be isolated only to RP.
Their line of "that's the way I am, I cannot change" is pure BS. People confront their inner demons. It is by no means easy, and especially not pleasant, but it is worth it when they succeed. Very, very worth it, for everyone involved. And if this person is driven to succeed, it is likely that they will enjoy life much better when they succeed at this. But the way they sound from your description, they are simply too put off by how unpleasant it would be to contain this behavior to even try. It's just easier to give in and get vindictive right away.
I'm reminded of one particular teacher's stance on the topic of excusable behavior. A young child [large for his age] came into her class with a documented anger management disability. When he started fighting other children in the class, he tried to say "But I'm [whatever the issue was]." When she sent him for the standard punishment, he kept repeating it like it was some sort of free pass for his behavior. She explained to him that just because he gets angry easier than others doesn't mean people will forgive him for it later- it means he has to be more on guard than other people that he's getting angry and do something to stop it, whether it be to leave, talk to her, count to 10, whatever. It may not solve his anger issues in the long run, but he knew he was no longer allowed to beat up the other kids and get out of consequences by claiming to be a victim himself.
There's this guy I've been playing with for about eight years. He's a nice guy, but he hates losing, whatever the game is. To be honest, his roleplaying isn't very impressive either, but he's a fun person to have around and he can often contribute well to a gaming table. Still, he hates losing.
First of all, I understand that this issue is a lot more complicated than just guys sitting around a table and one of them being a jerk. You guys are all friends and have been friends for a long time, and there are complex social dynamics going on outside the game. So even though the- kick him out, tell him to grow up- options seem logical and would work. I can appreciate why you don't want to use them.
I've been there before. I had a guy I played with who was going through a divorce be such a jerk that I stopped running games for around three years. The experience was so bad I didn't even play for two years. It stopped being fun.
The one thing I can suggest is talking to the player frankly and directly about the issue. Instead of taking the, Here's My Problem, stance, try starting with: It seems like you do not enjoy the challenge level I present. Every time things become difficult, you get angry. Do you think I'm being unfair or do you just want the game to be easier?
Get him to talk about what he wants out of the game, and why he's pissed off. Is he mad because he thinks you are screwing with him unfairly, or is he mad because he just wants to win. If it's the first, you all need to come to a consensus on what a fair challenge is. If it's the second, you need to explain to him that with the exception of survival he is the one that sets the conditions to win. And if he sets the condition to win as - Always being able to defeat every obstacle easily - then he is going to continue to be disappointed and frustrated. Because as a GM it's not a whole of fun to say: You win. You win again! How many HD does the dragon have, it doesn't matter because you are always the winner and I'm just the jerk off that sits here and tells you how great you are while you roll plastic dice.
He needs to appreciate that your enjoyment of the game is being effected.
I have one player who has admitted to mentally quitting the game if they miss an attack or fail a save.
I won't kick them out though, because they're not being a douchebag. Usually they also come back to the game after about thirty minutes of vacant staring and dice stacking.
If I ever had blow up at me over a game... I'd be wondering why I was playing D&D with myself in a mirror. I'm the only person I know of that's started yelling about tabletops.
My suggestion:
Have a come to Jesus talk with him. Either he's in or out. He's infringing on the enjoyment of others..period. Either start playing right or dont play. You are the DM so you decide who plays and who doesnt. Hes 18 years old...time grow up some. I would just say are you in or are you out?
Remember, you hold the key to the door. Who you give it to is up to you.
I have a paragraph in my house rules document that addresses this.
"Every character is expected to be "special-forces" material, and be capable at what they do. You are part of an elite group that relies on each other for survival every day. Playing a "lone-wolf", psychopath, spoiled brat, moron, or other non-team player will not be tolerated. Characters are generally not allowed to attack, target with hostile spells, or use adversarial skills on another PC (or allied NPC). PCs are also expected to not steal from each other, or withhold information. All treasure discovered is considered group property until divided up."
This might prevent some role-playing that could be fun, but it goes a long way towards keeping in-game conflict out of real-life. Next time he decides to become Revenge-Boy, ask him to start up a new PC, as his old one just became an NPC.
One more thing. At your age (assuming you're around 18) people change fast and are really still forming their personalities. A year from now, this could just be something to laugh about between you two. It could also be the thing that made him a better person in the long run. Do your best to avoid a huge blow up, either by dealing with it, or asking him to take a break for a month or two. You might not be able to avoid a nasty argument or some hurt feelings, but don't do anything that will force you too far apart.
With that said, some people never get over these kinds of things. One player in my group gets upset, but realizes it, calms down, and gets back to playing (age ~40). Another player cheats, disrupts the game, and whines up a storm - until we stopped inviting him (age~45).
|
|
I have a 14-year-old nephew who hates losing as well. When playing board games, he used to get bent out of shape.
Before every game, I started sitting him down, and while his mom & dad were setting up, I told him "you're going to lose this game, but we're going to have fun anyway." I'd then outline how things were going to go bad for his guy or token or whatever, the dice would go bad, he'd get sent to the [whatever] space, have to go back 3 spaces right at the end, or whatnot, but we'd all have fun just playing the game.
Then we'd sit down to play.
Sometimes he'd win, sometimes he'd lose. In some tense games he'd still get upset when losing occasionally, but after doing this every time, it's gotten a LOT better, now.
Just every time, maybe sit down and say, "Hey, your guy is gonna lose today. The fight's not going to go well. The bad guy's gonna get the info, and you're not going to get your clue, but we're going to roleplay and have fun anyway."
Maybe if he gets used to the idea of losing and the world NOT ending, he won't get so upset. It worked for my nephew, anyway. :D
If you have enough players within your group you should either put together or run a one shot adventure together. Once you both decide (as equals) on your preference, you share both the story telling and the overall play of the NPC's. That's not to say that one or the other fully controls each part of game play that is interchanged every other cycle (combat), but each one of you does take the lead in combat for one battle and in story the next. This, as close long time friends allows you both (truthfully the way it sounds him) to not only learn to work together as the GM?s (fellow gamers) but as equals. There without a doubt will be some disagreements, maybe on both sides along the way, but how you deal with this is set some guide lines before play (example 5 minute discussions though both must agree to the allotted time) and if there (after the allotted time) are no agreements the argument shall be recorded and dealt with like adults once the session has ended. This allows the game to flow properly and all to stay fully engaged. You can then sit down together @ the end of the session (either in front of the group or as GM's) and be each others critics and still as individuals feel empowered for your contributions.
Personally I think the persons that have invested the prep time should (by themselves) sit and discuses the sticky points of the session.
Through our own groups experience I can tell you this works, and truthfully it has been expanded so as to include contributions from all that invest there time on a regular basis.
I haven't read the thread, I'm afraid so this might be old advice or completely off-topic. Nonetheless, I thought I'd comment in that I used to be very similar (I didn't used to take it out on other players but I did used to get irritable and generally kill the mood). It got to the point where I found myself fudging die rolls as a player (ie blatantly cheating) 'in the interests of the story' because I felt the challenge was unfair, the game needed to get back on track or whatever rationalisation I could come up with (all terribly selfless and magnanimous, of course).
My epiphany came when I realised that although my character lost when his plan failed - the player's goals are different. There's a lot to be said for triumphing over temporary setbacks - nearly every fantasy story I can imagine (and I started looking around) features the protagonist facing a dire threat, which just gets worse and worse through the novel/series/whatever - until it seems they are absolutely doomed to failure....then suddenly they triumph anyway through skill/luck/cleverness or whatever.
For me that was a turning point - from then on, when I 'lost' I figured "OK - it's now up to the DM to turn this setback into an interesting story. At the end of it all - I'm going to win even bigger through overcoming such impossible odds/unlucky events".
It might not help him, of course (and I do confess to sometimes still taking it too personally when my d20 decides any number over 5 is taboo for a night). Nonetheless, if you can persuade him to see a setback as a 'delayed win' rather than a loss - perhaps even sketching out 'what would have happened' had he allowed himself to be captured or to have fled in some specific adventure when it bugged you. It may improve everyone's experience and still allow you all to hang out with the people you want to.
We've got a guy like this at our table, as well as the main DMs wife, and I'll admit I get annoyed at times too.
Usually the wife and I are pretty good about it, but when she gets upset she just stops playing and grabs her phone and starts farmvilling it up.
For me, I'm just annoyed at the number of times I roll 1s on my d20s. I've had so many times I roll a one at a critical time, while the DM rolls 20s against me.
But the third guy is a heavily mythos nut when it comes to elves. anytime something doesn't add up for him as an elf, he starts getting annoyed, even angry and does start becoming more aggressive. Unfortunately he never learns from his mistakes either, When I DMed once I was pretty mean, as I'd have quite a bit of traps that existed to prey upon his weaknesses, as he is also the greediest player out of all of us as well.
You know I do have one player who gets upset when they lose, but she's my 8-year-old youngest child.
@Steelfiredragon, good advice on telling someone to calm down though - if anyone at the table start to get over-wrought, it's time to call time out and stop playing for ten minutes. Don't wait until they get really angry, start as soon as they get a bit miffed, before get get so wound up that they just get more wound up.
Oh and the best response to his protests:
"But I hate to lose!"
"And I hate the way you act when you do, but you're the only person who can do anything about either of those problems, so deal with it."
There's this guy I've been playing with for about eight years. He's a nice guy, but he hates losing, whatever the game is. To be honest, his roleplaying isn't very impressive either, but he's a fun person to have around and he can often contribute well to a gaming table. Still, he hates losing.
He hates losing so much, it affects his actions in the game. All the time. I just realised once more how much it could kill everyone's fun and I'm asking you for advice on how to take care of this problem, because he can sometimes ruin everyone's fun, especially his own.
So there it is : this guy plays just about anything, but every single character he plays suddenly becomes agressive. And remember, he hates losing ...
I will add that in thirty years of DMing, it's a really bad idea to put players in a no-win situation, that always annoys them, even the best players, as does taking or breaking their stuff (at least if you do it too often).
Perhaps the best kind of game for this player is a revenge-oriented campaign. The BBEG begins the game wronging, or having wronged, the PCs. All of them are united in wanting to get revenge on him. Curse of the Crimson Throne starts off this way, and it's a cool way to unite a party and in this case, tap into the player's psyche.
Weird, that's exactly what my campaign is about. Sadly, instead of all teaming up to seek revenge, my players' characters didn't get along well at all because of the chaotic evil halfling rogue that kept killing or try to kill everyone they met. His character is kind of a problem itself, but that's my fault. Still, couldn't see it coming before it happened, and I can't really tell him how to play his character either.
And I rarely put my players in no-win situations, but it happens when I feel they really deserve it. Charging headfirst towards the king's castle without using any form of stealth or trickery seems like a good moment to send an army on them, the said army being the entire castle guard (since the whole kingdom is looking for them after they tried to murder royal knights and defied the authority of the king several times). And they had a few opportunities to escape after that, too! Still, they kept acting without planning or working together, charging towards the enemy. Sometimes, players have to face the consequences of their failures. That's what I think. Giving them a third chance to escape would've been a bit too soft, and the castle guards would've been idiots not to put under heavy surveillance highly wanted criminals that tried to escape twice, wounding the prince during one of their attempts.
...and I thought gaming with Charlie Sheen would be fun...
However, you mentioned him getting mad at being surrounded by an entire army at level 5 - well, my players would go awol on this as well.
If that was a real example you should cut down on plots that carry the danger (or, even worse, assume) that your PCs will find themselves in situations where they simply only can give up/die.
@MicMan : My campaign was about giving an enormous power to my players and then remove it from them to see how they would fare with normally constituted characters of their level. The thing is, they did not use their powers wisely at all. They used it to kill knights, innocents, wreak havoc on cities, cause total chaos. Yes, it was a bit cheap of me to put them in a situation where they just couldn't escape, but then, they were captured because they were defeated several times (while they could have won fairly easily) and mostly acted like idiots when they actually had a chance to escape (trying to break out of his prison, one of my players broke the cell door open and then just went back in his cell when he saw the twenty guards in the prison, only to get beaten up for destroying his cell door). Sometimes, when mistakes keep piling up and when you've been accused of murders and betrayal to the king, who now captured you because you ran headfirst towards his castle without planning, I don't understand how you're not supposed to end up AT LEAST ONCE in a situation where there's nothing you can do.
I'll admit, i've been gaming for about 15 years, and I've only lost 3 characters to horrible painful death.
And one of those was an AWESOME death... LVL 8 Paladin going toe to toe with a dragon....
he didn't WIN... but I can't think of a better way for him to have gone out :)
How OFTEN does he 'die'??
Death should be a constant threat... But the threat shouldn't be carried out very often. Games are hard to keep on track if every week someone has to bring in a new character and do introductions. These are supposed to be Heroes who are the center of the story... I'm curious how often they die...
As for poor decisions...
and mostly acted like idiots when they actually had a chance to escape (trying to break out of his prison, one of my players broke the cell door open and then just went back in his cell when he saw the twenty guards in the prison, only to get beaten up for destroying his cell door).
THAT'S pretty Harsh... If I attempted a jailbreak and found 20 guards waiting for me... I'd quietly go back to my cell too and hope nobody noticed the damage.
OBVIOUSLY that escape plan was flawed... I would have considered the ATTACKING the 20 guards to be the idiot move ;)
Unless they had prior knowledge that there were 20 armed guards waiting for them out there... THEN it was dumb to even TRY to escape...
But yeah, regardless... if he's got that much bottled up rage over a game... he should get some anger management counciling.. Just because YOU only see it around the game table... doesn't mean it isn't there at other times... I've seen it do wonders for people.
If I got that angry at a game, I shouldn't play it. If other people at the table got that angry... I'd probably stop playing.
And that says a lot... since like many others here, I am HORRIBLY... HORRIBLY addicted to my tuesday/Saturday game nights!!!