dmgrendel
Squire
Posts: 42
Favorite D&D Class: Barbarian on the table, Cleric at heart
Favorite D&D Race: Orcs!
|
Post by dmgrendel on Apr 14, 2015 4:56:56 GMT
I have a problem player. He's watched a lot of TV and loves Benedict Cumberbatch in Sherlock, and Mr. Spacey in House of Cards. His characters- in every game we play, be it 3.5, pathfinder, CofCthulhu, a Mass Effect D20 I found, or a damn D20 modern campaign- are always played as chaotic neutral 'I make my own morality' ie whatever suits me at the time, ends justify the means, my character is an ass-hat and doesn't care about you guys, etc, etc, etc.
I've talked to him about story, I've planned bits of backstory and tried to draw him in that way, but to no avail. What it really seems like he wants is a tabletop Skyrim, where he gets rewarded for having no moral compass and for researching builds that purposefully break the game.
I don't want to kick him out. I don't want to order him around. What I'd really like, is a magical DM solution. My best idea so far is to create an NPC, who slowly becomes important, develops a relationship of any kind with the player, and that becomes a tool to draw him in.
Am I nuts? I'll take any advice. He's an old friend, and I've put up with it for a year and a half now, but I'm starting to develop a PC vs. DM attitude, and I know that is unhealthy. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Apr 14, 2015 6:17:20 GMT
The thing that really sticks out to me is how this hasn't resolved itself through the other players at the table. It seems like this mentality/approach would negatively affect the others at the table and that they wouldn't want to put up with it. You could frame the next adventure in a way that would allow you to say that X alignment currently isn't available for play. Aka the people funding the adventuring party only contract a certain type of people, or the law could be very strict about things and you could have the police take him in. The other thing is being very straightforward with them and let them know that running the game is difficult, or not fun, when they play characters with that mentality. It will probably be rough, but it is for the better, which sounds cliche, but is very applicable. Hope that helps, and hopefully others have more helpful advice too.
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Apr 14, 2015 7:01:24 GMT
In a game I DMd Will and Wilfred both started out as basically chaotic Nuetral characters. They both played it like a Skyrim game and it was really cool to see how the players changed at the end of that one-shot. Wilfred the Fighter was still obstinate about the game, and he even still thinks D&D is stupid (I repeatedly tell him it was partly how he played it, but whatever). On the other hand Will the Wizard played the short second game I cooked up and played it just for the story (outside of a window he broke through, because he just had to talk to somebody). I saw both type of players in one game. It sounds like the player is pretty obstinate about his allignement. He would probably (as it sounds) play CN even if his alignment said otherwise. All the ideas "I" had, just before writing this, I realize I have already butchered a thousand times in Oblivion...
I would try to get him very ticked and hateful of a named villian. Chris and Mitch once said (long ago in a meat section far far away) that if all your players hate a villian, then they would be more focused and have more of a goal... the easiest way to do this is to make a villian destroy/steal/cripple something the character likes. Just an idea and certainly not completely helpful, but it is the best I could think up.
If all else fails drop a sudden, unexplainable horde of goblin grenades on him (just joking).
|
|
magicmark
Squire
Posts: 31
Favorite D&D Class: Sorcerer (I am the Boom Stick!)
Favorite D&D Race: Lapid (ain't nobody as Hard as a SodHopper)
|
Post by magicmark on Apr 14, 2015 12:39:05 GMT
Alright, the first time I played, this was me, and if you ask Mitch and Chris they will tell you I'm still a bit of a Munchkin, though I intentionally tone that down for the sake of my group, there are two things that really helped me kind of break out of this perspective: 1, the Campaign of restricted Alignment, our group has Played now good only and evil only, and though in the past CN was my absolute favorite Alignment, now i live for CG, because in the end I as a person would rather be Robin hood over a Selfish thief. the Second was taking the time to research what Alignment really is and learning that CN is not "video game" style whatever i want when i want, that is more CE (sociopathic). Not sure if this is his problem but remind him that he can't "win" a RPG, or put it they way to win is to have the most people having fun at the same time at the table, it's a co-operative game even the DM is on your side he's just the facilitator of the experience.
But really the Best thing is to force his hand and present a campaign where he has to look through a different set of eyes, and if you need a quick fix, have him go online and learn everything he can about CN, tell him that if he's going to be that alignment he better play it properly.
Removal should be a last resort be table top RP is just sometime not good for certain people and if you friend can't make a change it may not be for him, that's a hard conversation to have but letting him continue to ruin a thing like RPGing could cost you either a thing you love or a person you care about and a conversation like that could keep both.
(in other news love the "frackin'" BSG is great!)
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 14, 2015 14:17:06 GMT
To break this mentality in my group I used a lot of consequences. "Oh, you want to kill everyone in the tavern? Ok, now the city watch is after you. Oh, you killed a bunch of city watchmen? Now they are after "cop killer" style. Oh, you managed to survive the hunt? Now you are banished on pain of death from the city and its surrounding lands."
Speak bluntly with the player before instituting this. Let him know this is not Skyrim, that his actions have consequences, and that you will not pull any punches on this front. If he want to play a sociopath, that's fine. However, in a normal society, sociopaths get locked up, executed, or killed vigilante style.
Don't just kill him outright. Don't do it punishment style. Just make his actions reverberate through the game world. Maybe mothers start hiding their children from him when he walks through towns. Shop keepers refuse to do business and call for guards as soon as he enters the shop. Villains try to recruit him. The more you can engage him in the "reality" of the game world, the more likely he will be to make a change.
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 14, 2015 14:18:14 GMT
And fore the record, CN is my favorite alignment and the one I play as most often. I do not play is sociopath or psychopath style. I usually play it as more of a "rugged individualist".
|
|
dmgrendel
Squire
Posts: 42
Favorite D&D Class: Barbarian on the table, Cleric at heart
Favorite D&D Race: Orcs!
|
Post by dmgrendel on Apr 14, 2015 15:07:34 GMT
My other players are really good about keeping him in line, I'm just frustrated that it's a never-ending battle for them. Last night in D20 Modern, he was all for murdering a guy who accidentally bettayed our group and the guy's completely innocent wife, even though they never saw the PC's faces.... We all had to convince him not to. For the record, I don't think he's a budding psychopath.....
But I like the advice. I've definitely impressed upon him the repercussions of his actions. Which he took as over-bearing DM-ness. He now wants to run or play an evil campaign, because he knows I won't let him just run roughshod over our world. Ugh, maybe Im just in this forum because I want people to complain to....
Though I do have a larger D&D philosophical question: Is the game the will of the players, because they're the participants and what they want is what the game should be?
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Apr 14, 2015 15:20:45 GMT
Is the game the will of the players, because they're the participants and what they want is what the game should be? According to Mathematical Chaos Theory (see my signature), Theological Discussions, and Biblical Analysis we don't have a will at all... everything is predetermined. But, all joking aside, I wonder about this myself. The name of the game is 'roleplaying' so, technically speaking, the players should be acting the role of their characters. But, at the same time it all boils down to what the players want to do. I think a balance is needed. I think that this is what you were talking about...
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 14, 2015 15:26:25 GMT
Though I do have a larger D&D philosophical question: Is the game the will of the players, because they're the participants and what they want is what the game should be? Yes and no. D&D, at its core, is a collaborative game. The DM is a participant too, and gets a say. However, it is important to cater to the play styles of your players. The 5e DMG has a bit to say about this early on. Also, letting your PCs run an evil campaign doesn't have to mean them ruining your world. Include them in it. Let them roll up evil characters, run an evil campaign, then, have the ripples of their actions flow down the timeline. Take a cue from our illustrious DMs_Block hosts and make their actions, or even the characters they create, the enemies in a future "good" campaign. Perhaps your PCs succeed in their goals in an evil campaign. They conquer the world and create an evil empire. Then in your next campaign they roll up good characters who are freedom fighters battling the oppressive empire set up by their evil characters. Perhaps they have to fight the actual evil PCs, or perhaps its the PCs descendants. If their evil characters destroy the world, then that opens the door to a post-apocalyptic survival campaign where the PCs have to survive the horrible aftermath of the cataclysm. I'll come back to my first sentiment: Its not all about the players, nor all about the DM and their story. D&D should be collaborative in some way, even if you are collaborating on antagonism. The more engaged your players are, the more fun everyone will have. As the DM, it is your job to find the angle to engage them, but that does not include catering to their whims. Nor does it include allowing "problem players" to ruin the fun for the rest of the group. 'Cause, let face it, some men just want to watch the world burn.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Apr 14, 2015 16:45:33 GMT
Though I do have a larger D&D philosophical question: Is the game the will of the players, because they're the participants and what they want is what the game should be? I echo friartook's sentiment. D&D is a collaborative effort. It's as much the players' game, as it is the DM's. Since being on the WOTC forums, one of the good pieces of advice I've gotten there is that D&D is a "social contract". Nothing written in stone, but each person SHOULD be there for the same reasons. That is, to have a good time and engage in their character's part of a story. Mitch & Chris did one of the early podcasts about problem players as well as alignments.
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Apr 14, 2015 16:56:47 GMT
Friartook hit the nail on the head as I see it. D&D (and the like) should be collaborative storytelling experiences. I think of the DM as the project manager as they are the one with the big picture available to them and the final say on things in question. That is to also say that each player is a very important piece of of the team with very important roles to play in shaping the story as it goes along. As long as everyone is working together to create a story, and have fun together then you are good to go. If there is anyone, or anything that is impeding this it needs to be addressed as quickly as possible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2015 21:29:21 GMT
Alignment is seldom the problem. People playing Dysfunctional Group Members is the problem, and you can play a dysfunctional character of any alignment. A lawful good paladin is the DGM in a group whose primary motivation is to murder villagers and steal their wealth.
You can forbid alignments, and disallow actions that are contrary to allowed alignments, but this may lead to player resentment. I think the characters should correct the problem, not you. If the DGM player resents the other players for reacting rationally to a disruptive influence (i.e. the CN guy is endangering the entire mission to save the world, we have to get rid of him) and steps up his disruptive activities with a new character (decides to kill a party member during his guard shift while everyone is asleep), then he is a dysfunctional player and has no place at your table.
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 14, 2015 21:47:16 GMT
then he is a dysfunctional player and has no place at your table. This is the only part of your post I disagree with, only because I'm assuming this person is a friend of dmgrendel. I guess its really the tone I disagree with. If the player is making the group not fun for others, is not interested in engaging with the game and is only interested in willfully disruptive actions, then yes, its time to have a discussion about whether or not they actually want to be at the table. Just saying, "You have no place here, begone!" feels like a harsh solution. Not that I think you were actually advocating that nevvur, I just want to clarify the context for all the new DMs here. Presumably, we all want play a game with our friends and have fun. I guess dmgrendel, you have to assess why this person is being disruptive; are they bored? Not really interested in the game at all? Are they just an antagonistic person? I have one of these in my group, he just wants to insight conflict and mess with people. He went from playing a changeling rogue (for whom such antics were perfectly acceptable) to playing a LG dwarf paladin who is a member of a royal dwarven line (for whom such antics would not make sense). He still wants to RP, and is not willfully disruptive, but he does still want to make mischief (he wanted to slip hallucinogenic drugs to the other characters while they slept, something his character absolutely would never do, I just said, "No, you can't do that, your character wouldn't do that, and anyway, where'd you get the drugs?").
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Apr 14, 2015 22:08:08 GMT
He still wants to RP, and is not willfully disruptive, but he does still want to make mischief (he wanted to slip hallucinogenic drugs to the other characters while they slept, something his character absolutely would never do, I just said, "No, you can't do that, your character wouldn't do that, and anyway, where'd you get the drugs?"). Haha! I would have just allowed him to do that. That sounds hilarious. Could you imagine all the other players waking up... Hahaha! In one point I agree with Nevurr, because of the experience I had with Wilfred. But I twisted Wilfred's hand in order to get him to play D&D in the first place, so it was mostly my fault.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Apr 14, 2015 22:30:30 GMT
I think we can all agree that a 1-on-1 talk with the disruptive player is the place to start. You don't want to go down the path of "punishing" the player in-game. Talk to them privately and tell them your concerns. Don't dress them down at the table in front of everyone. In fact, I'd avoid doing it on game night completely if at all possible.
Tell them that you want them to have fun, but remind them that they are just one piece of the pie, and that they should be taking everyone else's views into account too. Remind them that you are putting together a story that everyone should have fun in. If he wants to do certain things, help him out and devise a way to make him feel more engaged, but stress that first and foremost, this should be a PARTY of adventurers, not a solo campaign. You should help him let his character shine, and he needs to not be so selfish in his motivations.
|
|