• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Whiney players....

Raven Crowking

First Post
prosfilaes said:
But you aren't giving advice to the whining player; you're giving advice to the DM.

True, but there has been enough "What if the player was gold, and it was the DM?" stuff in this thread to merit a response to the same. IMHO, if you're not enjoying a game, you should simply not play. Disrupting a game helps no one.

RC
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Slaygrim

First Post
Greylock said:
That's something that's seriously bugging me, too. Now, I know it's the norm of this sort of chat to often talk about someone who's not around, and likely never to be around, but Slaygrim has put some words in this fellow's mouth, but more than anything, he's put a hell of a lot of spin on his words and actions. And has done so to a degree that suggests an agenda on his part more strongly to me than it tells of the actual payer in question.

Right.
 

DestroyYouAlot

First Post
Felix said:
I'm determined to give the other guy, who is not here to defend himself, the benefit of the doubt.

That's just plain dumb, oh advocate of the absent-and-oppressed whiner. Giving the member of this community who's asking for advice would be the right way to go, here - the guy who doesn't post doesn't need your sensitivity (nor could he benefit from it).

Ridley's Cohort said:
I was about to side with the OP, when your post brought a few telltale details that were nagging me into new focus.

On one hand, letting the Wizard suck in an adventure seems like a valid simulationist choice. But that doesn't this 19th level BBEG with friends not squishing the PCs like bugs strongly suggest exactly the opposite in campaign style?

If this is a "trust me, we'll have fun here" kind of DM, then the construct/undead reeks of failure on the part of the DM.

If this is a "it is a real rough world, you better look out for yourself", then the 19th level wizard encounter has more than a few peculiarities.

I gotta say that I don't see the conflict in these playstyles. YMMV.
 


Slaygrim

First Post
Thanks DYA.

It's not like I am endlessly ragging on this player. I've said he can sometimes be good, and I have said he is an old friend. I do not want to kick him out and am searching for alternate ways to resolve the issue without conflict, which involves trying to make some changes and improve myself as well. I've said this more than once. Yet some people on here seem to want to attack me endlessly as if I am the one causing all of the issues.

I'll repeat, NONE of the other players had an issue with ANYTHING. Well, perhaps his buddy that he brought in, but they are really close, so they will be more likely to stick with each other, but the other players are fine. If it were all me, I'd be happy to step aside and be a player all of the time. I would rather be the player than the DM any day. Not only is it fun to portray your character and not know what to expect next, but I don't have to deal with problem players as much as well.

The whiner has a long history of complaining in a non-constructive manner. He'll scoff at me when I am DMing, challenge me, complain, pout, and make a scene. If you want to act like he is the victim, fine. If any of you are going to act like that I must assume you are a similar type of player because I can't make heads or tails of any other reason why you'd defend this type of behavior, even IF I made mistakes as a DM. Pouting, throwing a temper tantrum, and making the campaign difficult for other players due to your behavior is unacceptable PERIOD, far more than DM mistakes on CR.

And don't say the adventure was too hard. It wasn't. I had it specifically set up to make the encounter an an even playing field. While the PC's were 5 at 10th level, they all have very high stats, are very competent players, and are loaded with more magical items than your typical 10th level character. More like a 14th or 15th level character. All things considered they were more like a party of 12 or 13th level regular powered characters. Not only that, but they were aided by a 15th level NPC (whom the PC's were informed of before hand that he was a spy against the common enemy) and the PC's learned throughout the dungeon that the enemy battled most of the constructs and monsters, thus clearly they weren't at full capacity and prepared to battle the PC's.

All things considered, it was a pretty tough battle, but one I expected them to overcome. The other players were fine with it, just the one who always has a problem with something wanted to complain... besides perhaps his friend he brought into the game whom has strong ties to the player and not to me. But even he didn't raise much of a stink.

Was I perfect? No, there were some things I did that could have been improved upon. But when I do something that's messed up, I am open to talk about it maturely away from the table or after the game. I am not about to throw a fit, ruin everyone's time by moping around, etc. It's a game, my life goes on afterwards.

I picked up some good things I want to do here. I want to open a stronger dialogue with the player, express my concerns to him and listen to his complaints as well. This was we can get it out in the open and hopefully move on. Knowing my friend, I expect him to be more condescending to me when we have this conversation but I am trying to avoid looking at it this way. It's hard because I know him and he doesn't admit he does anything wrong, ever. Since I have known him, about 13 years, I honestly do not know if I could think of a single time I would recall him admitting he was at fault on something. Knowing him so well it's hard to be optimistic about this but I will try to. Like I said, he is a good friend and I like the guy, but we just have completely different styles of gaming and it's a struggle. Which is why I am considering for the first time in forever of bringing in new people to add to the diversity of the group.

I hope it works out.
 
Last edited:

Ridley's Cohort

First Post
Slaygrim said:
What mixed signals might those be? I put together what I thought was a very interesting story-line, which is going to lead into an even greater story-line. That's what I ran. The only person who seems to think I "failed" was the whiny player.

The mixed signals are with respect to how you design adventures.

If your world has primarily "status quo" encounters, then they are what they are because that is the logic of the world. Some days the Wizard (or Rogue or Fighter) will be useless because the world is just uncaring that way. But then the PCs should logically flee when faced with your 19th level BBEG because there is no sane reason to believe survival would be possible.

If your world has mostly "tailored" encounters, then facing the 19th level BBEG makes perfect sense -- there is bound to be some way for (most of) the party to survive because the DM is going to wave his magic wand behind the screen to make that true. If that were the case, then your ancient crypt was presumably designed to torture the Wizard on purpose. (It is simply not true that the only challenges that could have inhabited that crypt were impossibly high SR creatures.)
 

Slaygrim

First Post
Ridley's Cohort said:
The mixed signals are with respect to how you design adventures.

If your world has primarily "status quo" encounters, then they are what they are because that is the logic of the world. Some days the Wizard (or Rogue or Fighter) will be useless because the world is just uncaring that way. But then the PCs should logically flee when faced with your 19th level BBEG because there is no sane reason to believe survival would be possible.

They couldn't flee. There was only one way forward as the way the PC's came in was sealed. The player knew this. The character knew this. The player was acting out his whining through the character in a way that didn't make sense as he knew the only way to survive was to go through the battle.

Ridley's Cohort said:
If your world has mostly "tailored" encounters, then facing the 19th level BBEG makes perfect sense -- there is bound to be some way for (most of) the party to survive because the DM is going to wave his magic wand behind the screen to make that true. If that were the case, then your ancient crypt was presumably designed to torture the Wizard on purpose. (It is simply not true that the only challenges that could have inhabited that crypt were impossibly high SR creatures.)

Okay, we get it. You don't like the adventure. Thanks for stopping by.
 

Felix

Explorer
DestroyYouAlot said:
That's just plain dumb, oh advocate of the absent-and-oppressed whiner.
Not only is this clever, but it also adds to the discussion in a meaningful way.

Giving the member of this community who's asking for advice would be the right way to go, here - the guy who doesn't post doesn't need your sensitivity (nor could he benefit from it).
It's not sensitivity that's spurring me to give the whiner the benefit of the doubt: there is a serious problem between Slaygrim and Whiner that's disturbing their game, according to Slaygrim. If you take him at his word the only reasonable advice is to get rid of the guy, as a few on this thread have already said. Seriously, that's the only solution because the guy is a spoiled brat.

But.

If you take a step back and give the guy the benefit of the doubt, you may find that some of the problem lies with Slaygrim; it may have been miscommunication, divergent playstyles, or something about Slaygrim's DMing that Whiner hates but goes unnoticed by Slaygrim. By examining how Slaygrim runs his games, we may find something small that he can change that will result in a much greater improvement in Whiner's behavior.

Then again, maybe not. Slaygrim seems resistant to that line of questioning; perhaps because he's gotten defensive about how he runs his game in a thread that was meant to be a rant; perhaps because Whiner really is an immature spoiled brat. But we're not going to know, and Slaygrim isn't going to be very well equipped to deal with the problem unless we first extinguish the possibility that he may be doing something that's exacerbating the issue.

Or is that just plain dumb?
 

Felix

Explorer
Slaygrim said:
Okay, we get it. You don't like the adventure. Thanks for stopping by.
This is exactly not what Ridley's Cohort is saying. If your adventure design is based on verisimilitude, then Iron Golems and undead in a sealed crypt makes perfect sense. You did however appeal to the idea that your players should trust you not to run them through anything that they couldn't reasonably manage.

These two adventure design philosophies are not always at odds, but neither are they always consistent with one another. He suggests, while not condoning the actions taken by Whiner, that it may frustrate a player to have to both deal with a simulationist game world and trust that you wouldn't present them with anything that will simply mop the floor with them.

Does that make more sense?
 

Bagpuss

Legend
Slaygrim said:
he knew the only way to survive was to go through the battle.

I love how you seem to imply nothing could be wrong with your DM style, yet keep posting stuff like this.

Okay, we get it. You don't like the adventure. Thanks for stopping by.

Obviously you don't get it. So far you have told us your adventures consist of...

- railroad plots
- An NPC that outshines the party and comes to the rescue
- Multiple encounters designed to render this players character virtually useless
- but also some other good stuff as well (it ain't all bad)

and you still think he's the one totally at fault for complaining. Maybe he didn't go about things the right way but he has some valid complaints.

If the first dungeon you run has Iron Golems, and undead with SR, and he feels useless and complains. Then the next dungeon also has Iron Golems, isn't he going to feel like you just ignored him? Does he know you changed it from 100% Iron Golems to a couple and Helmed Horrors instead?
 

Remove ads

Top