|
I'm sure we all had these before. You call your friends/players, tell them when the next session is, tell them that you are starting a new campaign and tell them that you want to run a heroic campaign with good characters. You ask if that is going to be a problem, and all of them say "of course not".
Fast forward to session no.1 Most players got the gist of things and made good or at most neutral characters with good leanings. They have good backstories and you are happy. But then, along comes a player who casually drops a sheet with a [this is an example] chaotic evil drow abyssal sorcerer.
And then he gets angry at you when you tell him that that character doesn't fit the concept of your game, and that you have informed him of this already. He of course starts bi*****g about how you're cramping his style, and suffocating his creativity. Then of course, you being a good person let this player play the character. Naturally, the campaign is over after session 3 at best. Because of the [CE drow sorcerer]
Needless to say, i do not allow these shenanigans at my table anymore. If i say good campaign, no evil character will be approved. And i have given serious though of banning CN because then the would be evil player just takes the CN alignment and plays an evil character saying how he randomly determines his characters actions.
When i want heroic fantasy, i want a bunch of virtuous, maybe a little gray with the morality people who want to do the right thing, not a bunch of nihilistic sociopaths who, by accident, save the day.
Don't ban CN.
If the guy is acting CE, change his alignment. As soon as he hit's CE, you put out your hand and tell him to hand over his character sheet. Then, his character realizes he's in the wrong group and absconds with some of the team treasure, maybe after stabbing the Paladin in his sleep.
While he's making a new character, let the other players hunt down his old character and kill it.
I like that idea mdt. Wish my previous DM had gone with it instead of the Status Quo is God.
LOL, Thanks. Usually once I explain that to people at the start of a game, it's no big deal getting them to not play the evil jerk guy pretending to be CN.
|
Ugh. Sounds horrible Hama, you have my sympathies.
I have always thought that my characters don't exclusively belong to me they are formed through interaction with the other players and with the plot. However this kind of self centred playing goes against that ideal.
A GM has the right to lay ground rules for campaigns. For example I tend to disallow Evil characters (not always but usually) and my players are usually cool with that. The rules are there to give people a flavour of the campaign they are going to play, anyone who blatently ignores GM ground rules is just being a whiny, entitled jerk.
It's the "my character would do that" syndrome. It's an attitude that says "screw the rest of the game. As long as I play my character the way I want then everyone else can take a running jump."
Here's the thing, I know it may be controversial but a tiny bit of metagaming is OK. If the "logical" thing for your player to do will ruin everyone's enjoyment and bring the game crashing to a halt then don't do it. Just because you feel you are justified in doing something IC does not mean you should do it. A good roleplayer finds a way to play with his group and make compromises to promote everyone's enjoyment.
This prima donna player on the other hand is treating you as a GM and the rest of the players as his own personal supporting cast. In his eyes his own enjoyment and roleplaying is more important than anyone else's. It's a very selfish and childish attitude to take.
If you've got a player who's like this much of or most of the time, why invite him to play?
Fundamentally this is no different than someone showing up with 25 point buy when the DM said 15, or "adding numbers" to your attack roll to make sure you hit, or inflating your armor class to make sure you don't get hit.
Basically- you are going outside the prescribed rules of the campaign and taking advantage of options the other PC's didn't have, since they followed the rules.
Unless you'd allow the character in question to "explain away" the extra 5-10 point buy, don't let them "explain away" why they can ignore the alignment restriction.
Afterall- the guy who's playing the Paladin might have really wanted to play an Anti-paladin and once you "break the rule" for one guy now he's special while everyone else is effectively punished for following the rules you set forth.
So in short, I totally agree with not letting someone sit who has agreed to, and then decided to ignore, the basic campaign setup rules for character creation.
-S
It does depend on the players' maturity. I've been allowed to play evil, and have played with other people who were evil, with the meta-advice to not be a jerk to each other, especially if its one evil member among a bunch of neutral/good characters (if it is an all evil party, anything goes---but generally you know that going into it!).
I'll play my Red Mantis Assassin as an evil dude, and I'll do evil things, but my character understand that, for the duration of the adventure, it is selfishly in my best interest not to be a jerk.
If you've got a player who's like this much of or most of the time, why invite him to play?
I think this is the real question here?
Your player is being contrary to the point of disruptiveness and needs to be uninvited from the sessions.
End of problem.
Don't ban CN.
If the guy is acting CE, change his alignment. As soon as he hit's CE, you put out your hand and tell him to hand over his character sheet. Then, his character realizes he's in the wrong group and absconds with some of the team treasure, maybe after stabbing the Paladin in his sleep.
While he's making a new character, let the other players hunt down his old character and kill it.
Your posts are hit-or-miss with me. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I think you're totally off base.
Today, you get two huge thumbs up. +2
Needless to say, i do not allow these shenanigans at my table anymore.
Anymore? Wow... you're a better man than I. I've never had the patience to deal with that crap from day 1. (To be honest, I can barely even imagine somebody who agrees with a particular course of action and then does the exact opposite a short time later.)
Needless to say, I don't allow evil characters if I'm to be the DM, and no one has ever tried to 'circumvent' that.
Needless to say, I don't allow evil characters if I'm to be the DM, and no one has ever tried to 'circumvent' that.
Personally, I don't think the problem is with evil characters; the problem is with jerky characters (who can be of any alignment, sadly).
Personally, I don't think the problem is with evil characters; the problem is with jerky characters (who can be of any alignment, sadly).
Oh, I agree. My statement was just an example in the context of this discussion. Think less "evil character" and more "no one in our group would ever try to circumvent that parameter" [i.e. they aren't jerky].
Perhaps true, but totally irrelevant. The GM has the right to disallow evil characters no matter how mature you might play them.It does depend on the players' maturity. I've been allowed to play evil, and have played with other people who were evil, with the meta-advice to not be a jerk to each other, especially if its one evil member among a bunch of neutral/good characters (if it is an all evil party, anything goes---but generally you know that going into it!).
I'll play my Red Mantis Assassin as an evil dude, and I'll do evil things, but my character understand that, for the duration of the adventure, it is selfishly in my best interest not to be a jerk.
I agree, if the dm talks ahead of time about what kind of game they want to run, then players should follow those guidelines. Those are the rules now. The important thing is to let them know along with anouncing the campaign. If you do that a player has no excuse to not follow the guidelines.
Don't ban CN.
If the guy is acting CE, change his alignment. As soon as he hit's CE, you put out your hand and tell him to hand over his character sheet. Then, his character realizes he's in the wrong group and absconds with some of the team treasure, maybe after stabbing the Paladin in his sleep.
While he's making a new character, let the other players hunt down his old character and kill it.
Your posts are hit-or-miss with me. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I think you're totally off base.
Today, you get two huge thumbs up. +2
LOL!
That's fine. As long as I'm beating the broken clock, I'm happy. :)
How about this scenario.
Running a large group of 7 or 8 players. All players are in mid 20's or older. All are interested in an open-style game with a minimum of railroading by the GM (I am the GM usually). They are as interested in their character's development and evolution over time as they are in defeating foes. It is not a simple dungeon crawl experience.
Then we have one player who is absolutely not buying in to anything in the game. Doesn't care about plot developments. Completely disruptive when speaking with NPC's. Likes to change his character's accent at whim. Randomly makes off-topic comments about movies, politics, weather etc. Combat actions are an absolute joke. Hasn't bothered to read the rulebook and relies on others at the table to tell him what he can and can't do.
So we have everyone at the table engaged in the game and one guy who just doesn't get it. Not sure how much longer I can put up with this. Other players are now complaining. Time to bounce the problem player? Have him pound sand and move on?
After reading the OP again, my comment may be a little off topic. My apologies. Just needed to vent a bit. Shouting down the well so to speak.
Other players are now complaining.
Then why aren't they doing anything about it?
(I've never bought into the whole "DM controls the social aspects as well as... everything else" bit of nonsense [not saying that's occurring here]. The other players are abdicating their duty to a good game. *ahem*)
Other players are now complaining.Then why aren't they doing anything about it?
(I've never bought into the whole "DM controls the social aspects as well as... everything else" bit of nonsense. The other players are abdicating their duty to a good game. *ahem*)
Afraid that the problem is my doing. I felt sorry for the guy in question and not to get into any detail, I thought that he could use some friends during a difficult time. So against my rule that the group was already a little too big for my liking, I convinced the rest of the group that having him join us would be manageable. I agree that it doesn't fall only on me when there are players who are acting out of sorts, but in this case and as host of the game...
Frustrating that some players are incapable of seeing just how different their actions are vis a vis the rest of the group.
Developer
|
Just dump him. Trust me, it's not worth it. Such players shouldn't be playing anyway, they just ruin the fun for everybody else.
Well, talk to him. If nothing changes do this. Don't feel bad either. Someone ruining everyone's fun does not belong. Playing at your table is a privilege, not a right.
If y'all have so many extra players lined up that you're throwing them out of your games over the "alignment" entry on the character sheet, PLEASE SEND THEM TO HOUSTON. With one player in Iraq, one playing Daddy, and one locked up, I could use enough to actually, you know, have a game at all.
Unless the player, personally, is a dick, I don't really care how much of a dick his or her character is.
|
|
Unless the player, personally, is a dick, I don't really care how much of a dick his or her character is.
Dick players usually play dick characters. Not all of them, but too much. A normal, good player playing a dick character will realize when the dicksihness of the character has crossed the line and will tone it down for a while. A dick won't. That is why i would rather not play than play with a bunch of entitled dicks. Thankfully, i live in the capitol city of my country so there are enough players to go around. Plus, as my other players tell me, whenever i start a new campaign, there is a frenzy of beggars who ask them to ask me to have them play with us. I don't know why really, I'm just a GM, not a god of storytellers or something. Maybe that's because i actually want my players to have fun.
Send them to Troll Town!
Dick players usually play dick characters. Not all of them, but too much. A normal, good player playing a dick character will realize when the dicksihness of the character has crossed the line and will tone it down for a while. A dick won't. That is why i would rather not play than play with a bunch of entitled dicks.
I say sir, you are impinging upon my honor with your libelous statements!
I'm sure we all had these before. You call your friends/players, tell them when the next session is, tell them that you are starting a new campaign and tell them that you want to run a heroic campaign with good characters. You ask if that is going to be a problem, and all of them say "of course not".
Fast forward to session no.1 Most players got the gist of things and made good or at most neutral characters with good leanings. They have good backstories and you are happy. But then, along comes a player who casually drops a sheet with a [this is an example] chaotic evil drow abyssal sorcerer.
And then he gets angry at you when you tell him that that character doesn't fit the concept of your game, and that you have informed him of this already. He of course starts bi*****g about how you're cramping his style, and suffocating his creativity. Then of course, you being a good person let this player play the character. Naturally, the campaign is over after session 3 at best. Because of the [CE drow sorcerer]
Needless to say, i do not allow these shenanigans at my table anymore. If i say good campaign, no evil character will be approved. And i have given serious though of banning CN because then the would be evil player just takes the CN alignment and plays an evil character saying how he randomly determines his characters actions.
When i want heroic fantasy, i want a bunch of virtuous, maybe a little gray with the morality people who want to do the right thing, not a bunch of nihilistic sociopaths who, by accident, save the day.
Your post makes me think it is the exact same guy from my post in this thread that I started after hearing a different story that I thought was also the same guy.
It worries me a little that there's that many more of them out there.
I'm sure we all had these before. You call your friends/players, tell them when the next session is, tell them that you are starting a new campaign and tell them that you want to run a heroic campaign with good characters. You ask if that is going to be a problem, and all of them say "of course not".
Fast forward to session no.1 Most players got the gist of things and made good or at most neutral characters with good leanings. They have good backstories and you are happy. But then, along comes a player who casually drops a sheet with a [this is an example] chaotic evil drow abyssal sorcerer.
And then he gets angry at you when you tell him that that character doesn't fit the concept of your game, and that you have informed him of this already. He of course starts bi*****g about how you're cramping his style, and suffocating his creativity. Then of course, you being a good person let this player play the character. Naturally, the campaign is over after session 3 at best. Because of the [CE drow sorcerer]
Needless to say, i do not allow these shenanigans at my table anymore. If i say good campaign, no evil character will be approved. And i have given serious though of banning CN because then the would be evil player just takes the CN alignment and plays an evil character saying how he randomly determines his characters actions.
When i want heroic fantasy, i want a bunch of virtuous, maybe a little gray with the morality people who want to do the right thing, not a bunch of nihilistic sociopaths who, by accident, save the day.
At that point I go into "Call Out" mode aka "put the idiot on the spot"
Player:I have a (insert illegal character)
GM:That is not allowed
Player:Stop holding me back
GM:Did you not get the email/phone call/etc
Player:Yeah
GM:Could you recite it to me
Player:<Recites the message>
GM:Do you remember your response
Player:Yes
GM:At what point did you get the idea to make this character, and at what point did you let me know you had an issue with the idea so I could adjust things or at least open the rules up to everyone?
Player:Well I got the idea a few days ago, but I never said anything
GM:How is this fair to the other players who already had the idea in mind to play heroic characters if I you will be doing non-heroic stuff
Player:They can still be heroic
GM:I will put it this way. They had the idea of a heroic group. They have come here today expecting that. Should I scrap the game, just because you decided to be different or not say anything until the last minute. Tell me what is fair about that?
Player:<no response>
GM:I am still waiting for the answer. I guess you don't have one. Here is brand new character sheet though.
|
|
I say sir, you are impinging upon my honor with your libelous statements!
And how would that be my good sir? I thought i have covered all the bases when i said that not all jerk characters are played by jerk players.
@ Wraithstrike
I like it. It might work next time if i get an idiot not to go by the rules.
@AArdvark barbarian
Unfortunately, there's a whole lot of them. And not just players. Gms too. I have played with several. I am not even friends with them anymore.
I say sir, you are impinging upon my honor with your libelous statements!And how would that be my good sir? I thought i have covered all the bases when i said that not all jerk characters are played by jerk players.
Hama, you said 'capitol city of my country', so I'm going to guess that English isn't your first language? Unless that capitol is London.
"Lord Richard" is making a joke with his name and the use of Dick, a common nickname for Richard.
|
|
@ TOZ
I know your MO, you make funny and good opinions in a same post. A rare gift, use it well. I was aware you were joking though. :D
@ Kain
Right you are! My first language is serbian, which is a slavic language, but i have been learning and using English since i was 4. Still a small mistype, or an error here and there does infiltrate my speech/writing.
Ah, i just wiki'd capitol...man, i feel a little dumber for not knowing the difference, but, now i know, and knowing is half the battle :D
@ TOZ
I know your MO, you make funny and good opinions in a same post. A rare gift, use it well. I was aware you were joking though. :D
@ Kain
Right you are! My first language is serbian, which is a slavic language, but i have been learning and using English since i was 4. Still a small mistype, or an error here and there does infiltrate my speech/writing.
Ah, i just wiki'd capitol...man, i feel a little dumber for not knowing the difference, but, now i know, and knowing is half the battle :D
Right. Capital/Capitol's not a big deal, I was just guessing that because English wasn't your first language, you might not get the pun with Lord Richard and the use of dick. Your English is really good and my Serbian wouldn't even compare.
It's simple. Not every player is going to fit a GMs play style and not every GM is going to be ideal for every player. If someone doesn't fit your game, or vice versa, end the gaming relationship. I have great friends who i don't think i'd GM for just because what i enjoy as a GM is different from what they like (if you lay down ground rules and someone subverts it, then it's pretty apparent that your GMing wont make them happy and vice versa).
Have npc's repeatedly stab them in the face every time they do something you don't like.
Important note: do not try this in real life or you'll be playing a very different game with your new cell mate named Peaches who thinks you're just like a pretty girl.
My first language is Serbian
Dobar Dan! I spent some time in Beograd and Novi Sad last summer -- beautiful country, very resilient and forward-looking people. I salute you!
Unless the player, personally, is a dick, I don't really care how much of a dick his or her character is.
Must...resist...urge...to...join...game...and...act...like...dick...
So I have an update on our problem player.
Our game was last night and we had a situation where the player in question hounded the only female gamer in our group (who is also playing a female character) to put on a dress that he had 'altered' in order to seduce some guards we were trying to get by. In spite of comments by everyone else at the table, including our brave female gamer, he kept on this kick for the entire session. I think it was an attempt to inject some levity in a very somber setting, but it failed completely in this respect, and made the rest of us very uncomfortable. The alchemist was ready to bomb him just to burn up the stupid dress. It was a failed punch-line repeated over three hours.
After the game he and one other player stayed behind. When Mr. Dress-up decided to criticize the other players for their lack of role-playing I just couldn't let the situation go on any longer. I tried to tactfully explain that we have a fundamental difference of opinion about what the game should be and what constitutes 'good role-playing.' I said that the rest of the group is very happy with the style of game and the pace that we are going. I hope that feelings weren't hurt, but letting the situation continue is not going to end well and risks ruining a game that 8 of us really enjoy. I don't think he is a bad person, but he just isn't a good fit with the rest of the group. I don't think that unanimity is required to ask a player to leave a group, but it is nice to have consensus. Everyone agreed that it was time.
So one less player at the table, but a more content group overall.
Lord Richard.
An ENTITLED Dick. (With a capital D. Ha-HA!)
I see whut you did thar. ;D
|
|
So I have an update on our problem player.
Our game was last night and we had a situation where the player in question hounded the only female gamer in our group (who is also playing a female character) to put on a dress that he had 'altered' in order to seduce some guards we were trying to get by. In spite of comments by everyone else at the table, including our brave female gamer, he kept on this kick for the entire session. I think it was an attempt to inject some levity in a very somber setting, but it failed completely in this respect, and made the rest of us very uncomfortable. The alchemist was ready to bomb him just to burn up the stupid dress. It was a failed punch-line repeated over three hours.
After the game he and one other player stayed behind. When Mr. Dress-up decided to criticize the other players for their lack of role-playing I just couldn't let the situation go on any longer. I tried to tactfully explain that we have a fundamental difference of opinion about what the game should be and what constitutes 'good role-playing.' I said that the rest of the group is very happy with the style of game and the pace that we are going. I hope that feelings weren't hurt, but letting the situation continue is not going to end well and risks ruining a game that 8 of us really enjoy. I don't think he is a bad person, but he just isn't a good fit with the rest of the group. I don't think that unanimity is required to ask a player to leave a group, but it is nice to have consensus. Everyone agreed that it was time.
So one less player at the table, but a more content group overall.
Tactfully? I would have thrown him out after the firs hour of bothering a female player. Down here, they are far in between, and it is very rare that you find a good one. When you do, you do your damnest to keep her around.
|
|
Oh, get this. I played world of darkness last night, with a few friends i haven't seen in a while. One of them is kinda slow. And we played an awesome game for the first hour or so. I was an IT guy working for a strange "Egyptian" corporation. Another friend was a dealer in antiques, and a blacksmith. Third was a reporter. The slow guy was an "occult expert" who was famous and well known in the circles of old ladies with cats :D
So, we all go to a goth club to research some information, but he decides to take a walk outside. So two guys attack him with batons. He pulls out his 9mm and shoots one in the chest and the other in the arm. The chest-shot one expires on the spot an the second guy runs away. He continues the walk as if nothing happened. A pair of cops approach him, recognize him as the tv personality and one even asks for an autograph. It is very obvious that the cops are friendly to him, and completely not suspecting him of shooting two men.
One cop then asks if he noticed something, because there were reports of gunshots in the area.
And then.
And then.
And then the slow guy actualy answers:"Yes, it was me who shot those shots"
At first, we all thought it was a joke, and one of us even laughed. So the GM makes the cops laugh and say that it was a good one, but really, did he notice something.
He repeats the statement, and we realize that he is serious. I call for pause and explain that we are playing in the modern world and that here cops do not take gladly of vigilantism. He responds that he only protected himself. I respond with this:
"You were attacked by two drunken young men with sticks. You pulled a gun at them. A gun you have no license for. You shot one and killed him, and shot another who ran away. That's manslaughter and attack with intent to kill in cop's eyes. There were no witnesses that they attacked you in the first place, and to be honest there was no need for you to shoot. A gun is intimidating enough. Be reasonable".
He still is firlmy refusing to change the statement. GM sighs, and cops arrest him, and he gets tried and convicted and goes to jail.
He gets up from the table and screams that it is not right, that this would never happen in a video game and that he is the protagonist. He then rounds on me and tells me that it is all my fault, because without my input, the GM would maybe resolve things differently. I simply tell him that he did it to himself, with nobody's help.
He punches me, in the eye. I proceed to beet him to a pulp. The group disbands. The GM calls me today, tells me not to come to the next session if i am going to beat on his players. I'm gonna go to the next session just to see what happens.