First of all I want to point out that I am a fellow player in this campaign rather than the DM. The DM does recognize the issue with this player though.
To give you some background I will tell you that everyone in my gaming group are real life friends and my 10yr old son is among them. The problem player that I am mentioning here has been an issue for a long time with our group for the same reason.
The problem? He is contrary. I understand that needs more elaboration. I'll try and I can also give some examples. He tends to make characters that are not strictly an antithesis to an existing character but basically is the opposed to the rest of the party in some way. He likes to compare his character to being the Wolverine of the X-Men which makes it sound a lot better than it is.
So some examples of his behavior. Well, the biggest issue seems to be that he tries to be diplomatic with our enemies far too often and at inappropriate times (like in the middle of battle). He always wants to look at things through the enemy's eyes and see it from their perspective. He is a sympathizer. After all, how dare we invade the goblin's homes? They have a right to protect their homes just like humans do. In fact, aren't we the evil ones for invading their homeland and slaying them simply for not just handing over their treasure?
And what makes this all so unbelievable? He tends to play evil aligned female characters that tend to focus on charm and compulsion type spells. Evil doesn't strike me as a sympathizer for anyone and charm type characters don't seem like they would care what anyone would think of the morality of their actions - they can just make them think what they want them to. Just pawns in their big game and all that jazz, you know?
So some specific things he has done. Hm, well he played a Paladin of an evil bat goddess in a World's Largest Dungeon game that was really just self interested. That isn't very conducive to the style of play that is required for that campaign.
In the next game he played a schizophrenic multiple personality disorder sorcerer. He had a chart he would roll on to randomly determine what personality he would get. He would roll on the chart whenever the current personality was forced into a triggering condition. The campaign was a "not the good guys (but not necessarily bad either)" mercenary game. While it was decided before we started playing that our characters needed to get along with each other regardless of our motivations and alignment this didn't seem to matter to him. Our characters found it very hard to justify a reason for bringing such a loose cannon along. At one point early in the campaign while discovering an artifact that we concluded would raise a god from imprisonment it was decided we would use it in the dungeon we were at. There was a statue of a god with his arms outstretched as if waiting to hold the artifact. We all decided that we should place the artifact in the statue's hands. He disagreed. He was out voted. This did not stop him from trying to physically prevent my character from placing the artifact in the statue's hands. My character did not take kindly to his psycho character trying to forcibly remove the artifact from his hands and a fight nearly ensued which would have ended badly for his character.
And tonight? It happened again. We are playing in a world that is about to become post-apocalyptic with our characters being some of the few remaining survivors. We are sort of playing through a prelude of a pre-apoc Golarion right now but we were told that after the apocalypse that our characters would be brought to an idealistic fortified island town created by a benevolent ancient gold wyrm dragon interested in remolding the destroyed world into a new utopian society. The road to this utopia would be hard fought and much of the pressure being laid at the feat of our characters. ...so what does he decide to play? An evil witch interested in taking the Eat People hex so he can cook up people in her cauldron and eat them for buffs.
We are currently on a mission to destroy a goblin camp. Well, actually we had just completed that mission and found a treasure map among the loot and we lost the man who hired us in the fight with the goblins. We decided to pursue the treasure map before returning to town. Along the way we ran into a ship in the middle of this swamp that looks as if it was brought to beach. We enter the ship and are immediately attacked by dire rats and another foe who escaped that we didn't get to see. After the fight with the rats we decided to rest inside the boat which doubled as a way of waiting to see if the other foe returned. It did. It was a ratling looking thing and it again attacked my character on sight. Another battle ensued.
What did he have his character do? ...yep, he tried to diplomacize the foe. In the middle of combat. "Wait, don't fight us! We don't want to hurt you. We want you to join our party!" Then later in the fight, "No, wait, don't fight! I'll pay you 23gp if you will be our party's leader!" Then when the fight was over he wanted to heal the ratling thing back to consciousness so that he could interrogate it. He intended on leaving it alive afterwords. This thing had just tried to kill the entire party. I have no idea why he seemed surprised that my character was opposed to this decision. My character wanted to kill the thing. It just tried to kill him! But no, he was sympathetic to the ratling thing. From it's perspective we are invaders to it's home. It has right to protect it's home.
He was upset that my character wanted to kill this critter. He said that the party doesn't need a dictator telling everyone what they can/can not do. I told him I wasn't interested in controlling his character. He wanted to vote on the issue democratically. I told him I wouldn't stand for resources to be used on healing our enemy. He threw a fit saying that the party didn't need a dictator. I told him I wasn't trying to dictate anything. The party could vote on what they wanted to do with the ratling but MY character was going to kill it. The rest of the party agreed with me that it should just be killed. I finally settled on allowing them to try to interrogate it. The ratling thing was healed to consciousness and immediately was upset at us, it's unjust captors and tried to escape from it's bonds with a Dimension Door spell like ability. We killed it before it could get the spell off.
I knew this would happen. But that isn't the issue. I don't want to play every game and have to have a discussion about the moral repercussions of our characters killing the bad guys and taking their stuff. I like to RP as much as I enjoy the combat unless the RP is causing problems for the rest of the party. I don't want to play with someone who is constantly bringing this (non)"issue" into the spotlight. I don't want to sympathize with the enemy in every fight (once in a while might not be bad). I don't want to play with someone who is more interested in the bad guy's motives than trying to stop that bad guy from murdering the rest of the party. I certainly do not want to invite them to join our party, much less PAY them to be our leader!
So I'm not sure what to do. While the DM has made it clear what type of character would be best for his campaign this player doesn't seem to care and wants to play his character like this regardless of the consequences of these actions on the rest of the party. I think that while the DM understands the issue (he played through this problem in the other campaigns I mentioned) that he is reluctant to force the issue out of feat that the player would just leave. He thinks this would stop the campaign as we wouldn't have enough players without him there.
I have considered simply reacting in character. If this character continues to show repeated efforts to sympathize with the enemy then would my character really have any choice but to consider his character an enemy? Why would my character choose to travel with someone like that? And if he actually directly endangers the party with his decisions then my character may have to physically intervene to prevent it. I fear this may lead to a fight and me killing his character. This may force him to come up with a new character. But whether it does or not it may cause a deep enough rift OOC that it might end the campaign by losing a player.
So what should I (we) do about it?
On a note (if you can), please put the scenario in a spoiler so as not to make a wall of text (it helps with reading and overall analyzing the situation you are explaining).
The GM needs to take a stance on this. If the players (and the GM both) aren't having fun, then the sessions and campaigns aren't fun, neither is the gameplay, or anything else.
If the GM truly finds the character's actions justified (AKA, major role-playing, all for the player behaving as the character), then you, as a character, should be justified in taking your action in either killing his character, or leaving the party due to his actions (of course, explaining the reasons why, in character).
Ultimately, you need to understand that the GM is a person too, and has an input in the situation just as you players do. While he has the final say (especially in cases of a tie), he, just as a person/player, can be persuaded in one direction or the other, dependent upon how proofing of a case you provide.
Personally? I would definitely bring it up with the GM. A player that we were playing with previously was constantly whining and complaining about how his character was ineffective at the role he wanted to play, and that he was always "mis-informed" or "confused" about concepts (we agreed he was pretty much depressed about it) for our campaign and the such.
My GM said he just constantly shook his head and explained it constantly to the player his rules and his logic behind said rules (which we all agreed upon before-hand), and so we were at a stand-still. Luckily (for him, anyway; the guy is really nice, but in board games, including games like Pathfinder, he is just a downer), he got a job that had him work off-days, so we wouldn't be able to play with him constantly, due to his schedule. We managed to find another player, and we replaced him.
It's all about connections and/or scheduling. If a GM/Player has a fill-in, and/or talks to the Players/GM about it, then there will most likely be an agreement, depending upon how everyone views the player in question in an overall perspective.
With that said, I wish you all good luck (and tidings) on the rest of your endeavors.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How big is your group? Getting rid of the problem player and having a smaller group is a much better outcome than being unhappy in a slightly larger group.
Either the player is immature and just doesn't get he is causing problems or he is just a d!$!&ead who doesn't deserve to be included in a group that wants to enjoy the game.
I'd suggest making your feelings very clear to the GM and individually talk with the other players, bar the problem one. If you can reach a consensus about booting him, just do it. Life is too short to deal with obnoxious people. And if you are real life friends - is obnoxious towards you all outside of the game?
Darksol: Yeah, sorry about the wall of text. It was all sorta pertinent though so I couldn't decide what to separate out.
I'm pretty much there with you that the DM just basically needs to enforce what he has already set forth for constraints about character creation. The problem is that he isn't. And I can't make him. I'm kinda wondering how I can approach the situation and explain the importance of resolving this before it becomes an issue. I am definitely going to bring it up with him but I'm just not sure how or what I can say to reiterate the importance.
Gallo: Yeah, that is part of the problem, I think. The group is:
Me
My son
the DM
Mr. B
Mr. R (the problem player)
The DM is afraid that if we lose Mr. R that it is too much of a loss and we will not have enough to run a game. He is probably right. So our options are either to basically force Mr. R to change his ways or find a replacement. Because the only other option is me leaving the gaming table (because I am not going to put up with it anymore) which eliminates 2 players (my son and I).
I am friends with all of them outside of the game too. Mr. R has his personality quirks like all gamers do but outside of the Pathfinder game I would not count him as obnoxious. I generally enjoy gaming with him... if not for this one, albeit serious, problem.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
He sounds like he's not listened to anything that you've said to him so boot him from your game. He's selfish and seems intent on making the game more pleasurable for him at the other players' cost.
You can still have decent game with three players (some would argue better as there's less disruption and everyone gets more spotlight time), especially if the DM runs a character. Alternatively, see if another friend (of yours, your son's, etc) wants a game.
Look at it this way: if you were on a football team and one player insisted on scoring FOR the opposition, or kicking the ball into the stands, would you put up with it?
This sounds like a familiar problem to me with some problem players from past campaigns of mine. The guys obviously just being contrary for kicks and enjoys making a mockery of the game. Though his justifications sound fairly well thought out and even funny, if his intention is to provide unwanted satire then I see why it rubs you the wrong way. I have an on/off regular player who has in the past played a cowardly self-interested barbarian, a noble Orc Diplomat, a hyperactive halfling Monk and an evil Torturer 10-year old psionic. Sometimes a bit of satire is fun. Makes you look at things and react to situations differently. But in a serious campaign with solid RPing, such silliness is not acceptable. Especially if it disrupts the game.
I've recently taken a stand in excluding this player from several games. The replacements we found turned out to be much more mature and added to the game in new and unexpected ways. Don't be afraid to cut off a necrotic limb. No matter how long you've gamed with this dude, if he's bringing your game down then he needs to shape up or be banished from the campaign.
|
If the game's not fun for others due to a disruptive player, be blunt:
Tell him you're there to have fun and he's making it not fun for the rest. If he complains about having his fun, tell him that he should find another group that finds what he's doing is fun as well.
It is also best to tell him he's not welcome back after the game, a day or two later than the last game, not a day or two before the next
One more possibility: the mythic playtest rules should come out this month. They should allow small parties (even 1-man parties) to do adventures.
Consider that a possibility with 3 players and a GM.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
{Wall of Text}
OK, what you have here is an attention hog. He does not want a dictator telling the party what to do, because he wants to be that dictator. He wants everyone to be in awe of his brilliance, and see how amazingly he thinks of creative solutions to problems.
Shame he can't really back it up with said brilliance in everyone else's eyes' but his, really. What he achieves is to be a complete dick.
There are only two real alternatives here: he has to change, or you have to stop gaming with him. As it's unlikely he will change unless you stop gaming with him, that really leaves one option.
Try and find another player from somewhere, by all means, but remember no gaming > bad gaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are afraid of losing this player from the group. Have you considered that he may be afraid of being booted? People who play like that have trouble finding groups. If he is booted, it's likely Skyrim for him.
Thus, if the whole group - GM and Mr B included - confronts him and tells him his behavior is unacceptable, it may be enough to scare him straight. If it doesn't, and he throws another "dictator" tantrum, then politely but firmly give him an "invitation to the world". I've run three person parties with me (as the DM) providing NPCs, and they were not only fun, but the PCs became very attached to the NPCs. They didn't hestitate to risk their lives to save/rescue the NPCs just like they would for a PC. It never even occurred to them to think differently. They LIKED those guys!
Bottom Line: This guy's characters are traitors. How are you justifying hanging out with him in game? You are metagaming your ass off not to just stick a fork in him and walk away. You're DONE, dude. Yep. I said it. He's roleplaying. You're metagaming. Would you (your character -that is) put up with that behavior from an NPC? Why are you putting up with it from him? Half of your frustration is that you aren't getting to roleplay your character because you have to pretend that feminine-hygine-product-carrying-container behavior is acceptable, when it clearly isn't. A cannibal witch, for Desna's sake?!
Still...save those character sheets... Those are gonna be some sweet villans later... I can't help thinking like a DM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll go along with Dabbler's diagnosis that he's an attention-hog. He believes he's brilliant, and he loves being the center of attention.
It's time for a group intervention; everyone says their piece, and then you invite him to shape-up, or ship-out. Attention-hogs (that's the nice word) tend to have low self-esteem, so it's likely he'll ship-out, but he may return in the future once he's thought about it, so everyone should be mature and respectful while they're voicing their complaints. Good luck.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Great Wyrm Gold Dragon: "Welcome to my utopia, if we all work hard we can make the world a better place. What skills do you bring to help us?"
Witch: "I cook people in cauldrons to get boosts for magic and combat."
GWGD: <BREATH WEAPON> "Next?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sit down and talk to him like adults. Do NOT tell him what he has "done wrong" but DO tell him that "When you do xxxx I feel yyyy".
You can NOT solve a OOC problem with IC actions.
Next the DM should never allow evil PCs in a more or less Good aligned group. Or CNs who play as if Evil. The DM should make him bring in a new PC. No being wishy-washy on this.
D&D is a Game. Games are supposed to be Fun.
Gallo: Yeah, that is part of the problem, I think. The group is:
Me
My son
the DM
Mr. B
Mr. R (the problem player)The DM is afraid that if we lose Mr. R that it is too much of a loss and we will not have enough to run a game. He is probably right. So our options are either to basically force Mr. R to change his ways or find a replacement. Because the only other option is me leaving the gaming table (because I am not going to put up with it anymore) which eliminates 2 players (my son and I).
I am friends with all of them outside of the game too. Mr. R has his personality quirks like all gamers do but outside of the Pathfinder game I would not count him as obnoxious. I generally enjoy gaming with him... if not for this one, albeit serious, problem.
Do you look forward to the games? Or do you have a slowly building feeling of dread as the game time approaches? It sounds like you are enjoying yourself despite Mr R., so put up with him (but a quiet word from the DM about his character choices would help). If you really aren't enjoying yourself then ditch him (and it can be done in a non-confrontational way, especially as you are RL friends). There are plenty of 4 person groups out there that work quite well. For all you know, the presence of Mr R. may be a block to other potential players joining.
A few years ago my group split due to the DM and one player making things unpleasant. For a few months we just played with a group of DM plus two players. Then we recruited a few more players and the previous group was just a bad memory (and food for occasional reminiscing about how bad things really were).
I plan to introduce my son to the game in a few years and would be worried by how a problem player interacted with my son and what behavioural "lessons" he was getting by interacting with said player.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For those suggesting booting him: While this is something we have all considered it isn't a perfect solution. We are friends outside of the game and generally enjoy gaming with him. That is, except for this frequent problem.
For those suggesting we talk to him: Its been done. In fact, it was done just prior to this campaign starting after the DM had explained that we are basically invited to this last bastion of (good aligned) hope secluded fortified island in a world full of evil. It apparently has not helped.
Bottom Line: This guy's characters are traitors. How are you justifying hanging out with him in game? You are metagaming your ass off not to just stick a fork in him and walk away. You're DONE, dude. Yep. I said it. He's roleplaying. You're metagaming. Would you (your character -that is) put up with that behavior from an NPC? Why are you putting up with it from him? Half of your frustration is that you aren't getting to roleplay your character because you have to pretend that feminine-hygine-product-carrying-container behavior is acceptable, when it clearly isn't. A cannibal witch, for Desna's sake?!
You might think I would take offense to this. I don't. Its true and it frustrates me. I hate metagaming in general. I guess if there is ever a "good" reason to metagame it is for the purpose of party cohesion. I still dislike it and do not plan on continuing to do it. You are absolutely right.
Great Wyrm Gold Dragon: "Welcome to my utopia, if we all work hard we can make the world a better place. What skills do you bring to help us?"
Witch: "I cook people in cauldrons to get boosts for magic and combat."
GWGD: <BREATH WEAPON> "Next?"
Yep, thought about that one too. You see, the way that we found out about the coming apocalypse was by picking up this minor artifact gem that shattered into several shards and delivered a telepathic message of the coming apocalypse and our role of caretakers in the world that blossoms from it's ashes. We do not yet know in character about the GWGD. I kinda wish we did because it would give my character reason to not want to be associated with such a person when the group meets the GWGD.
Next the DM should never allow evil PCs in a more or less Good aligned group. Or CNs who play as if Evil. The DM should make him bring in a new PC. No being wishy-washy on this.
Well, see, I agree with this. But how do you force it? The DM pretty much outright said no evil from the beginning but still allowed it.
So. After some thought I think this is what I have decided:
I can not control the DM. I can not control the other player. I can control myself. And Gallo is right about bringing my son into the game with conducive players and since I if I go my son goes too this is something I am forced to consider as well.
I am going to talk about the issue OOC and basically say that I am not willing to play in a game where we discussed prior to character creation that the party would be of good alignment and we have a player that forcing the rest of us to associate with an evil character. I am not interested in playing in a game with a character that frequently sympathizes with the enemy.
That leaves three options:
1. He leaves the game.
2. I leave the game (and my son)
3. He either changes his current character's outlook or plays a different character.
Since 1 or 2 pretty much leads to no game, I am voting for 3. If he simply denies that an issue exists despite the frequent reoccurring problem I will be forced to interact on an in character basis. However, the outcome is pretty much the same. My character is no more willing to party with an enemy sympathizer than I am. And if it continues I see it leading to a physical conflict. While I'm certain I would win this conflict the outcome of the conflict itself doesn't matter. Either way it would lead to either options 1 or 2.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you talk to him directly, use "I" more often than you use "You".
Let him know how it effects you, and your fellow players.
Your son is young, and he may end up teaching your son bad gaming habits.
Let him know you are not comfortable with this.
Let him know that you don't want to quit, but when people stop having fun, it defeats the entire point of playing the game.
Let him know that everyone's fun is important, not just his.
Your approach is very important, and you need to make sure your words do not sound like an attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Start a side game with your son that you DM. I've run a campaign for my wife for 16 levels and 16 years; you don't need another rule set if you have common sense and flexibility.
And you'll be amazed at how easy it is to tolerate a flawed game when you have one of your own running well.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your 'friend' is an a$$&~*$. Everyone knows it.
Y'all need to stop being a bunch of doormats and give him the just wage of being such a scumbag.
Boot him. The world is FULL of people who want to game with you. Go to three gaming stores, check the bulletin boards, and contact the people looking for a group... you'll have a better player in no time.
Continue to see your friend out of game, but never let him forget that in rpgs, he gives you a friggin' rash.
... I'll NEVER understand why people stand for crap like this. I've shown people the door for FAR less.
If you talk to him directly, use "I" more often than you use "You".
This.
This is a standard way of criticizing a person without insulting them or sounding aggressive. Anything they do that is positive, use "you."
As in: "You are doing this well, and I like how you do this other thing, too."
For anything negative, use "I feel."
As in: "I feel that this character is not conducive for this campaign." Or: "I feel that constantly asking evil opponents and I feel that undermining our party's mission makes the game less fun."
Avoid: "You are causing problems. You do this which hurts the campaign, and you make the game less fun."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your DM has said no evil right? How about if he does evil actions his alignment shifts and the character becomes an NPC? I think that's what they do in PFS.
Or just stay in character and do what your characters would do if someone betrayed them. Ditch or even kill the offending character (not the player).
Boot him. The world is FULL of people who want to game with you. Go to three gaming stores, check the bulletin boards, and contact the people looking for a group... you'll have a better player in no time.
What Vicon said can be a great idea.
I'm not sure if Paizo has any ways of finding new players in your area, but I used Pen and Paper Games (the website). They have a system set up to advertise and search for local players and games. When I left my old gaming group due to similar complaints as your own (except my problem was the DM, not another player), I used that website to find a new group. I've found some fantastic players, and we all get along really well. Now I have not only a great gaming group, but I have new friends.
I just sent an email to our group regarding this issue. I have taken the advice that you all have given and my own thoughts on the matter into consideration. Here is the email (names changed to protect identities):
So I have done some thinking about the situation at DM's game and come to a basic conclusion. We all had an in depth discussion prior to DM's game and I recall some required parameters being set. Those parameters have been summarily ignored by one player and I predict this will cause problems. The reason these parameters were set were to avoid these problems in the first place and by them not being enforced it is going to lead to one of the following outcomes:
1. Mr. R will leave the game out of an inability/unwillingness to create a character within the parameters that were set prior to the game.
2. I will leave the game due to not wishing to remain in a game where a player is being purposefully contrary despite parameters being set to prevent this.
3. Mr. R will need to either change his current character's outlook and alignment (or if he doesn't think that is feasible with this character then make a new character that adheres to the parameters) to create a more cohesive gaming experience for everyone.
The unstated 4th option would be for everyone else to change their characters to play in a game where they find sympathizing with the enemy acceptable game play. I feel that violates the very reason we were setting the parameters in the first place - because no one wanted to play in that kind of game. I really feel that this is simply selfish behavior as we all know how we feel about how this has went in the past. It has ruined games to the point of cancelling campaigns. To force a group into making a concession so that one person's play style can be catered to is unacceptable for everyone but that one player.
Since options 1 and 2 pretty much lead to the game being canceled, obviously I am opposed to that. I predict that we will have an issue with option 1 as Mr R has shown a recent inability/unwillingness to change in other facets of his life that lead to problems and changes with our game. While I'm fairly certain it wouldn't be hard for us to find a replacement player to fill an empty slot that doesn't really resolve anything and since we are all friends outside of the game I feel this needs resolution. That means that I am pretty much in favor of option 3.
Also, to be clear this isn't an In Character issue because I have created a character within the parameters that was discussed prior to the game. My character no more wants to party with an enemy sympathizing evil aligned character than I do with that kind of player. This is an Out Of Character issue. If it weren't then we wouldn't have had to have had the OOC discussion that we did prior to the start of this campaign that determined the parameters of character creation. If it were decided that we were going to play in an evil campaign I would have had no problem making a character that would have fit in that kind of game. It had been brought up that Mr R would have still have tried to play a contrary character in such a campaign. I guess I wish that the parameters that were set would have just been enforced so this could have been avoided.
I also have to consider the situation for more than just myself. My son is new to the game and I want him to have a positive gaming experience. He doesn't want inter-party conflict any more than I do and doesn't enjoy a game where a party member is constantly bringing moral considerations into encounters, sympathizing with the enemy and other generally contrary behavior. This isn't any more fun for him than it is for me. He actually was considering quitting because of it. This is one reason that My Wife wanted in on the pre-game discussion when our character creation parameters were being decided so that it could be ensured that this was avoided and we all can have a fun game.
Perhaps this is a self-resolving issue, though. I do not predict that such a character arriving to a Great Wyrm Gold Dragon's island that is an epitome of of all that is good aligned, idealistic creator of a utopian society of individuals to reshape a ruined world into a cohesive altruistic society would welcome such a character to his fortified last bastion of hope for good.
I predict it going something like this:
Great Wyrm Gold Dragon: "Welcome to my utopia, if we all work hard we can make the world a better place. What skills do you bring to help us?"
Witch: "I cook people in cauldrons to get boosts for magic and combat."
GWGD: <BREATH WEAPON> "Next?"
I know that this is an issue that DM struggled with prior to the campaign starting as well. So I'm hoping this will just be resolved without any further intervention from me. Either way I'm hoping for a resolution that is amiable to all of us and looking forward to our next session so long as this isn't an continued issue.
BBT: Hopefully I have used the "I" instead of "you" as much as possible in that email. I tried. But honestly, I feel that so much of the issue rests on his shoulders that it is hard to word things that way completely.
Vicon: Like I said, he isn't really a d-bag out of game. Even in game I enjoy playing with him aside from this single frequent issue. I can understand your comment about the doormats we are being. However, I can ensure you I am NO ONE'S doormat. It is not in my personality. That is likely why I am the one bringing this issue to a head. My DM though... I think he kinda is being a doormat here. And honestly that surprises me a bit as he is not generally that kind of guy.
Grimmy: He did say "no evil". That is one of the parameters that I mentioned that were discussed prior to the campaign. The player went ahead and made an evil character anyway. Thus the issue. I'm right with you on how I would handle the issue IC though. The problem is that I believe this is an OOC issue as this is not the first time this has happened with other characters.
Regarding the suggestion of just finding another player... I think I need to take the initiative and do that. I have asked some friends but some of them are unwilling to play with him. I am going to do some more asking around because if this leads to dropping him as a player and the game will implode due to player shortage I want to have some kind of backup plan ready. I hope that it wont come to that but my hope is dwindling.
That's a solid letter. Looks like you really did take our advice to heart. I know this kind of thing can be really hard on groups and on friends. I wish you the best of luck and I hope this turns out positive for you, your friends, and the group.
Thanx, bookrat.
Honestly, after having posted here for quite a while I sorta wish I could just game with some of you guys in real life. This is unlikely a possibility though due to distant constraints. Unless anyone lives near mid-Michigan?
Hopefully I have used the "I" instead of "you" as much as possible in that email. I tried. But honestly, I feel that so much of the issue rests on his shoulders that it is hard to word things that way completely.
It really is hard to do this. I still struggle with it when grading student papers (especially when they don't listen to me the first time and continue to make the same errors), so don't feel bad if you're having difficulties.
Thanx, bookrat.
Honestly, after having posted here for quite a while I sorta wish I could just game with some of you guys in real life. This is unlikely a possibility though due to distant constraints. Unless anyone lives near mid-Michigan?
Alas, I am 10000 miles away. But good job on the email. I hope you get a satisfactory resolution.
Remember there are lots more RPGers out there than you think. Last year I was being a very bored fullback in a very one-sided game of field hockey. I was chatting with the goalie and just on a hunch I asked "Do you play DnD?" Fast forward to the next Friday and we had a new player. Even if he is playing a (very well role-played) uptight Paladin in my very Chaotic Good Kingmaker Duchy!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just a question: did the DM tried to punish this player? You know, like having the world behave like it would and have his character killed by this kind of choice?
Like:
"Siren want to dominate you"
"Well, ok, she has this right!"
"She order you to slit your throat".
Thanx, bookrat.
Honestly, after having posted here for quite a while I sorta wish I could just game with some of you guys in real life. This is unlikely a possibility though due to distant constraints. Unless anyone lives near mid-Michigan?
I used to live in mid-Michigan, up until about a year ago. The old group might have somebody looking for a game though. :)
Hope that things work out for you, with either Mr. R shaping up or you guys getting a better player. Your letter said that your wife was involved in the pre-game discussion. Any possibility of getting Mrs. Lune to join you all?
sounds like a douchebag to me, that gets his fun by irritating other players. If he's a good friend of yours I'd talk to him, if he's just someone you play with, I'd say it's tome to cut him loose, sounds to me that he's done more good the harm, and if you keep on letting him, he probably won't stop.
You can always have fun with a small group, while looking for a new player.
I do know of your problem, difference is, we would just kill him and tell him to relroll. rince/repeat until he learns or leaves. But then again we're mostly fallout/homemade players, wich have a high death ratio, and none of us have any problems with players doing this, but we're a group that thrives on invidualistic playing, and none of us do this all the time to anoy anyone, it's just different types of characters. This guys sound slike one character that always is out to be a pain in the arse.
I'd say either fix him(he'd likely not find playing ordianry as fun though and might leave by himself)
boot him(might be best option)
or play something other then dnd now and then wich could give him an outlet to play something destructive(works very well for us, and is great fun for all. Everyone needs to let out some steam or be destructive sometimes, battle royale single shots are great for this)
Good Luck with your problem, I'm having my first DnD session on friday since 3.5 hope it'll be fun. Full good group, exept and evil witch, chaotic evil... He's most likely die, as we have a CG magus/oracle and a palla, all strong willed players.
|
There is another option.
Become the DM.
It's what I did more than 20 years ago because I had issues with how things were being run.
As for players, bring in one of your sons friends, would probably be easier to deal with than the problematic player.
Half your issues is with a weak DM not enforcing the constraints of the game. I have a player who likes to flaunt the constraints so I am constantly checking his character and making sure as he plays that its in character and not just on whim which does not fit with the background or alignment.
Pausing and asking why sometimes fixes things.
But you have an untapped player base with sons friends, so add a player or two from there...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a far more succinct letter is in order:
1) No evil characters or contrary shenanigans were to be tolerated at the onset of this campaign as a result of the above ruining the previous campaign.
2) the Parameters set forth have not been honored by you know who, and the reasons for this are not a mystery.
3) This PROVOKES an issue that must be addressed and brought to a head immediately. Either the player in question should be brought to heel, or preferably and permanently expelled from the group. I will take responsibility for acquiring a competent and fun replacement so that we can truly enjoy the campaign ahead as was intended.
Honestly, that's as soft as I'd word it. From your message you still sound like a bunch of wet-didie apologists for an obviously stupid-ass bastard who is capitalizing on your good graces, and calling your implorings for him to stop as some kind of bluff.
SHOW HIM THE DOOR. He *HAD* a second chance, it was called "design an appropriate character" -- he WILL NOT act right.
*YOU* are the fool now if you try to negotiate the terms of your being swallowed by a python.
This guy may be a great drinking buddy -- but he gets off on aggravating you. That's HIS angle at the table. You don't need that.
You also don't need to set an example to your son where you tolerate awful behavior from other people and suffer for how other people refusing to act right. The lesson you're teaching your son is that in this world there are ulcer givers, and ulcer getters -- his dad is a big sloppy getter, and if he wants to grow up happy he should take a clue and be the one giving the Ulcers.
You have higher standards to think of. Show your son, and your gaming group -- that what is most important is having fun and working together, and not tolerating disruption. Your pathetic capitulation and framing of this problem to somehow keep him included is flat out stupid at this point... and frankly I'm offended by how weak your letter is.
GUY. DOOR. SORRY. = an even better and more succinct letter.
@Blackblood
Jerkwad players can easily be replaced by non jerkwads. If jerkwad wants to kvetch or moan about it out of game... terrific -- he can lament about it when they see him at the movies, or some other non-RPG activity.
I've expelled people for being asshats. They've asked to rejoin. I've refused. I've held onto them as friends. Nobody died of emotional starvation.
I don't think a lot of people are truly understanding the repercussions of just kicking him out.
As is common with problems in social groups, the issue is much more complicated then that.
while this is true, there are limited ways to fix it unless he can change. Change is best, optinal games are a great way(but a lot of work)
if he's been doing this for a long time, odds are he's doing it because he's having fun doing it. So forcing him to change might be a long way around him just leaving because he can't do what he wants.Not an easy problem at all, I agree.
I just finished DMing. He was a player in my game. I gave required parameters for character creation and enforced them. This actually worked very well towards controlling his disruptive behavior. I thought my DM would have learned from this experience as he was in the game. I was really hoping that he would have adopted that idea himself.
I don't think my son's friends are into D&D. He is fairly mature for his age and I don't think any of his friends are really on the same level he is. I have some ideas where to find a player at though.
007 has the right idea here... having a friend involved, if it were possible might put some pause into the other adults at the table... but an immature player with a good excuse (he's actually immature) is still better than an immature player who doesn't have an excuse (he's an a!%!#$@) -- I'm sure this jacktard thinks his arguments and platitudes are just genius. What would really be genius is sending him out to grab something and locking him out of the house.
It scares me when I read these threads, and I seem to find a lot of them. Where the heck do you people come from when one person is wasting HOURS of everyone else's valuable free time being a jerk and nobody holds him/her accountable? Is there a gene in the gamer population that makes many of us irredeemable jellyfish?
I think it may have to do with PnP gaming only recently becoming more mainstream and less ridiculable, as such, perhaps many of us came up as being less likely to be the teasy, belligerent, uber-assertive types and much more the thoughtful, accepting, and eccentric types. I think this is a beautiful thing in a lot of ways... but when people use the accepting, " come as you are" atmosphere of role-players, twisting it into an arena to vent their angst and/or as some kind of condom for all the contrariness they feel the need to redirect from other aspects of their lives I think y'all would do well to remind them that THEY are the scumbag, not you.
rant off.
|
|
Well, if you take the following steps, then the only one who comes out looking bad, is the problem player.
1) Let him know the effects of his behavior, and let other players know you addressed him of it.
2) Offer him a chance to change his behavior.
3) If he refuses, then tell him he is no longer welcome.
Be sure to follow all parameters of these steps, and if he becomes hostile, let him know that you are sorry that he was unable to change his behavior to allow others to have fun.
I wish you luck.