Danceofmasks
First Post
Huh ... I'm ... speechless.
Help reign in a player who refuses to play his role
From what you describe it sounds like he's deliberately trying to irritate the people games with. It's a not a 'logic' thing at all, it's psychological. He's a 'bad instigator'.
I gamed with people like that. The central pleasure they get out of the game is doing things that are socially unacceptable, particularly to their own party mates. I guess its a power issue. These things usually are.
Danceofmasks
First Post
Yeah, and the only way to make 'em learn is with pain.
Such as ...
Make them buy the pizza every time they behave like a tool at a session.
Not fair? Now they get it.
Such as ...
Make them buy the pizza every time they behave like a tool at a session.
Not fair? Now they get it.
Gunton The Terrible
First Post
Well, technically he isn't breaking any rules, just that he is clearly playing his PC much weaker than what it would normally be capable of, and becoming a liability to the party as a result. Nothing in the rules do state that a paladin has to be a defender who tanks at the forefront, or cannot use daggers, though it is implied that you should at least be decent at whatever role you want your PC to fill out (eg, if you want a cleric archer, at make him an excellent archer).
Actually he is breaking rule number one. Everyone is here to have fun. If his fun is to disrupt everyone else's fun then he has to be delt with.
Deal with him in character or as players.
In character I would refuse to go anywhere with an adventurer that was cowardly and rufused to use his abilities to help the group. I certainly would not split loot with a spectator.
As a player I would simpley state, "play nice with others or go home."
This guy has a history of disrupting games with no remorse for the fun he is zapping out of the games. Friend or not, he would not be invited to another game.
Honestly, he sounds like a bit of a nutjob, but he isn't doing anything wrong. Playing a particular class is a matter of character background; it not an obligation to epitomize the usual actions of that class. If he's not attacking or threatening other PCs, then just let him role-play his character. If he's not acting like the meatshield, then there's no reason why your character in the game world--where things like "class" aren't physical things that actually exist--would have reason to treat him as one.
Obryn
Hero
Griefers are griefers regardless of edition.
Role-playing a character is awesome. Making sub-optimal characters can be a hoot, too, so long as the DM is aware of the situation and takes all of that into account.
Making an intentionally disruptive character with the intention of "breaking" the system is childish. Making the game less fun for everyone else around the table is inexcusable.
I'm kind of appalled your DM hasn't handled the matter, to be honest.
-O
Role-playing a character is awesome. Making sub-optimal characters can be a hoot, too, so long as the DM is aware of the situation and takes all of that into account.
Making an intentionally disruptive character with the intention of "breaking" the system is childish. Making the game less fun for everyone else around the table is inexcusable.
I'm kind of appalled your DM hasn't handled the matter, to be honest.
-O
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
And if he proves incompetent, you can also treat him as such in play.
But I find it better to address the meta-game issue. If it's symptomatic for the player, it is a problem of the player, not the character, and you have to address it on that level if you want to have any progress.
You have a few easy solutions.
1) Let the party handle it. They can always kick him. He doesnt seem to have any redeeming qualities that the party would want him traveling with them.
2) Let the encounter handle it. If he isnt doing his role and they get into a tough fight people are going to die if not everybody.
3) Another paladin of his fate running into him could create some entertaining banter of them questioning his cowardly actions.
Really I think the best option is to move forward with business as usually. As the GM your job is not to make people play their role correctly. Your job is to provide the world and react to what they do. If he is going to play like a nub which means the party dies then so be it. When they die he will die shortly after with his dagger in hand
1) Let the party handle it. They can always kick him. He doesnt seem to have any redeeming qualities that the party would want him traveling with them.
2) Let the encounter handle it. If he isnt doing his role and they get into a tough fight people are going to die if not everybody.
3) Another paladin of his fate running into him could create some entertaining banter of them questioning his cowardly actions.
Really I think the best option is to move forward with business as usually. As the GM your job is not to make people play their role correctly. Your job is to provide the world and react to what they do. If he is going to play like a nub which means the party dies then so be it. When they die he will die shortly after with his dagger in hand
Crack open the DMG and direct his attention to page 7:
"The last essential part of a D&D game is fun. It's not the DM's job to entertain the players and make sure they have fun. Every person playing the game is responsible for the fun of the game."
Quite simply, if his actions are making the game less fun for everyone else, he's playing wrong.
"The last essential part of a D&D game is fun. It's not the DM's job to entertain the players and make sure they have fun. Every person playing the game is responsible for the fun of the game."
Quite simply, if his actions are making the game less fun for everyone else, he's playing wrong.
Similar Threads
