I've. Said this before here:
Players care about their characters, the DM cares about the game.
This is why DMs need ground rules before running games, and why they shouldn't let players run with alignments, classes, etc. They don't want in their game.
The gaming experience is enjoyable for one guy. And no matter how much anyone argues, it's not your obligation to put up with it, nor (despite some people's opinions) does one persons disruption of everyone elses game make it your fault as the DM.
Letting it continue, however, is everyone's fault. You should call for a change in his play style and the rest of the gamers should back you on it.
There are two problems: The character and the player.
As far as the character goes, the other characters shouldn't feel any obligation to be saddled with him. They should leave him in town,or in a shallow grave somewhere out in the wilderness. He is endangering their lives willfully, knowingly, and intentionally.
The other problem is the player. You don't have to be a jerk to want to play a character who's a jerk. It can be fun, and funny, but when you're willing to take it so far that the other players aren't having fun anymore, guess what? Your character is no longer the only jerk in the equation. He - not his character - has chosen to be that guy.
I recommend giving someone the means to banish the eidolon. Preferably at around 200' above the ground, when he's flying away from combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a player problem, not a character problem, and as such, needs to be dealt with at the player level, really, which has been done. It would be a different thing if he were actually trying to overcome his courage, and maybe over the course of the next couple of levels stops being so yellow, but that doesn't seem to be happening.
That said, I do love the delicious irony of someone's disruptive behavior being 'excused' by saying "I'm just playing my character!" to be countered by the rest of the group saying "So are we."
I've. Said this before here:
Players care about their characters, the DM cares about the game.
This is why DMs need ground rules before running games, and why they shouldn't let players run with alignments, classes, etc. They don't want in their game.The gaming experience is enjoyable for one guy. And no matter how much anyone argues, it's not your obligation to put up with it, nor (despite some people's opinions) does one persons disruption of everyone elses game make it your fault as the DM.
Letting it continue, however, is everyone's fault. You should call for a change in his play style and the rest of the gamers should back you on it.
This is bogus: no DM should ever have to houserule: No backstabbing and undermining the rest of the group, except in the case of a new player.
Most campaigns operate under the "we're heroes" umbrella, and what this guy is doing is CN in the best light, and CE in the worst. Add on top of that the discussion "what are you going to play? A melee synthesist" which starts to define other group choices in terms of party roles, and he's undermined the group dynamic by playing a tank build as fraidy cat rogue. He's not offering the group value.
To blame everyone but him is silly, especially as the DM is clearly trying to be proactive without offending a friend. And the rest of the group are playing the game as it's designed: a team game. Even if your centreman doesn't backcheck in hockey doesn't mean you quit the game. You just tell your coach (the DM) to tell him to start back checking.
Which is what is happening.
To blame a selfish player for spoiling everyone's fun is like blaming the other kids for the brat who ate the cake while the other kids were playing pin the tail on the donkey at a birthday party, because he wanted cake now.
I'm actually one of the players that the OP is Dm'ing for (though not the player in question). I thought I would add a little bit of extra detail for everyone, as this thread has taken off more than anyone in our group expected it to.
As far as the running away issue. The player doesn't so much as run away from a fight, as he is constantly picking the easy tasks. For example, I'm playing a cleric of war. We were fighting a large group of bandit, I was currently fighting four by myself when four more showed up, moving towards the "cowardly player". Instead of fighting them, he moved away and took out an archer, leaving me to fight eight instead of four, I almost died from the battle.
Second, to address the scapegoat issue. The player got into a nasty situation and had a couple of assassins sent after him. When they began trying to kill him (ignoring the rest of the group entirely) my character stepped in to help him fight them back. In return he fled the city, leaving me to fight them, and thus placing me in the same crap storm as himself.
I hope the extra detail helps to let everyone know the two main issues the OP is talking about. There have been a few more minor ones, and our largest worry is just having an unreliable teammate; however from what I've read here, I think dealing with this entire situation in an RP sense would be the best option.
I'm actually one of the players that the OP is Dm'ing for (though not the player in question). I thought I would add a little bit of extra detail for everyone, as this thread has taken off more than anyone in our group expected it to.There have been a few more minor ones, and our largest worry is just having an unreliable teammate; however from what I've read here, I think dealing with this entire situation in an RP sense would be the best option.
Thanks for dropping in and giving us more info.
Why not just vote the PC out?
I am +1 with all the people who have said the proper response to "I'm roleplaying my character, and this is just the way is is,"
is, "That is absolutely fine. And we're all roleplaying *our* characters. And our characters do not like or trust your character, so we're not inviting him on missions anymore. Best of luck!" -wave goodbye-
Then make it known (in game) that your party is looking for a reliable trustworthy new teammate. And leave it up to him if he wants to create a new character with a more team oriented personality.
I don't see why letting the guy know no one is digging his character wouldn't be a good first step. I get the sense the player isn't the problem, his character's personality is.
And just to be clear, if the group isn't having fun and don't address the problem then it is the groups fault; for not addressing the problem. Addressing the problem doesn't mean you can't be polite and constructive either. I just think the OP should deal with his problem before the next game.
Lastly, Dr. Cal.
I don't think you got my first post. DMs shouldn't hesitate to rule some guidelines for the group though. Some players like to bend, some will try to break. The further from good players go the bigger PITA it is to DM for them unless the break from good is a group effort. Some character ideas sound good in thoery, some may actually be brilliant until put with a group. These are ultimately DM issues, obviously, touchy ones. The OP(DM) is the one who deals with the problem. You say no DM should have to houserule that players not undermine other players, yet you are here, with a DM who has a player doing just that, no matter how unintentional, and he IS going to have to address it. Call it DM fiat, house rule, whatever floats your boat.
pain in the backside
Um....if the summoner is CN it makes sense, if he's evil that makes even more sense. Summons. Tank to escape? Sounds like a character concept that you guys hate with a burning passion....as I recall the game is for imagination???? At least the PC knows how to run from a fight they know they can't win...
Your a cleric buddy you are gonna be one of the few actual pcs that will die for the party qq more. And your gorum battle is your thing you'll have a hard on for that fight.
But you can always just, you know be a dick and kill the coward as he's running away. Gets impaled from a trap, get caught in a rope hanging upside down and gets raped to death....can say more but will probably be hated for it.
I don't see why letting the guy know no one is digging his character wouldn't be a good first step. I get the sense the player isn't the problem, his character's personality is.
And just to be clear, if the group isn't having fun and don't address the problem then it is the groups fault; for not addressing the problem. Addressing the problem doesn't mean you can't be polite and constructive either. I just think the OP should deal with his problem before the next game.
Lastly, Dr. Cal.
I don't think you got my first post. DMs shouldn't hesitate to rule some guidelines for the group though. Some players like to bend, some will try to break. The further from good players go the bigger PITA it is to DM for them unless the break from good is a group effort. Some character ideas sound good in thoery, some may actually be brilliant until put with a group. These are ultimately DM issues, obviously, touchy ones. The OP(DM) is the one who deals with the problem. You say no DM should have to houserule that players not undermine other players, yet you are here, with a DM who has a player doing just that, no matter how unintentional, and he IS going to have to address it. Call it DM fiat, house rule, whatever floats your boat.
I've played plenty of campaigns as a DM and a player with CN characters and a handful of games with a good/evil party mix. I have only twice as a DM had to explain to a player that it is frowned upon to betray and undermine the group, and in both cases the players were newbies. The rest of the time there was always ooc discussion regarding how characters would react to certain choices. All very adult, all very consensual.
The only exception I've made was for two evil campaigns where anything went and the houserule dictated that. They were wacky, fun and unproductive on the actual adventuring side. The game isn't designed for parties of backstabbers.
If you've played D&D/PF, unless you have only played with anti-social jerks who run PVP campaigns that disintegrate before you leave town because you've killed the innkeeper and all hell has broken loose, you should probably know it's a team game where cooperation makes for success.
To blame a DM and the other players for not telling a player who is saavy enough to build a synthesist not to undermine the party is b*%&+~%s. The player's to blame and now the group has to deal with him. And hopefully he learns his lesson, though the "it's my character" defense makes me think that he may not.
Chaotic and evil characters don't get a pass for being stupid. Same argument against Lawful Stupid honestly.
At least the PC knows how to run from a fight they know they can't win...
He also runs from fights he knows they can win, and then gets his 'teammates' in trouble.
Picking your own fights isn't being a coward ;)
The easiest way to fix "coward" behavior is to talk to him about it.
If that doesn't work treat a combat he flees from as a failed combat, NO experience earned. After loosing the XP from a couple fights he will try to find ways NOT to run away all on his own.