DM's: How much do you help out your players in offgame?

[FireLance]

It seems to me that this player is simply unwilling or unable to play the game in the way that you want to run it.

It looks like he would prefer someone to hand-hold him through his learning period instead of simply being told to read up the rules and come up with solutions himself.

My suggestion is for you to pass him off to some other DM who would be willing to teach him how the play the game, and invite him back into your group only after he has developed a minimum level of proficiency.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, 16 sessions is not very long, but part of the DM's enjoyment can be hurt by the player not taking time to know the rules.

Now certianly, not every player is at a serious level, but I think asking for competance is not that much. I certainly do not want to walk hand in had withthe player through the game when I am trying to DM, and if the player does not know what they are doing, it makes the whole team weaker.

I have been running a game for about ten years (level 15 or so now) and really, none of the players really know the rules. I try not to blindside them with ruels, but it is so hard. Having the same conversations with the same players over the same things written on their sheets really gets to me also.

"Can I use rapid shot if I move?" "Can I cast and then move?" "What does power attack do?"

These are the kind of questions I get, even after 10 years. It is a long time.

 

[FireLance]

Well, 16 sessions is not very long, but part of the DM's enjoyment can be hurt by the player not taking time to know the rules.

Now certianly, not every player is at a serious level, but I think asking for competance is not that much. I certainly do not want to walk hand in had withthe player through the game when I am trying to DM, and if the player does not know what they are doing, it makes the whole team weaker.

Oh, I agree. I'm simply making the point that player expectations of how much on-the-game training (if I may coin the term) should be provided by the DM and, on the other side of the screen, DM expectations of how much prior reading of the rules should be done by the player (or equally, DM expectations of player rules mastery), is another potential source of player-DM incompatibility.

If one party expects more than the other party is willing or able to provide, and no compromise can be reached, it may be better to just recognize the basic incompatibility and look for a player or DM that has a more suitable playstyle.

 

[Hussar]

And, really, sixteen sessions is not a long time to learn the basics of your character? Really? That's probably about four months, possibly a bit more, that this person has been playing this character.

It's not unreasonable to ask someone to learn the basics of their character in FOUR MONTHS. I mean, jeez, that's an entire semester in school. The game's not THAT complicated.

Ten years? Wow, you have way more patience than I do. That would just frustrate me to no end to have players that disengaged with the game that they are still asking basic character related questions after several hundred hours of play. Ten years and fifteen levels, they've been at the same level for about a year at a time. Gack. No thanks.

Did I mention I love, love, love my players?

 

[The Shaman]

Then don't think of it as giving a limited set of options, think of it as giving him some analysis into the most prominent or obvious options he has. I help players with analysis of their options whenever they ask for it or seem to need it. I sometimes find that their understanding of the situation is substantially different from mine. Analyzing their options, in these situations, often helps clarify things for them.

Quoted for truth, and because I need to spread experience around before rewarding billd91 again.

 

[FireLance]

And, really, sixteen sessions is not a long time to learn the basics of your character? Really? That's probably about four months, possibly a bit more, that this person has been playing this character.

It's not unreasonable to ask someone to learn the basics of their character in FOUR MONTHS. I mean, jeez, that's an entire semester in school. The game's not THAT complicated.

Personally, if I was a DM and I was actually actively teaching a new player how to run his character, I would expect him to get the basics down within one or two sessions. This is something I take quite seriously, by the way - to the extent of running short introductory solo scenarios for every new player so that he can familiarize himself with the rules of the game, his character's abilities, and some basic tactics appropriate to his character before he starts adventuring with the rest of the party.

However, if I was not actively teaching the player, then his proficiency and familiarity with the rules would depend entirely on how motivated he is to read through the rules of the game. In the absence of active teaching, I would find it quite possible that a casual player, or one who is quite busy in real life, could still fail to grasp the basics of how to play his character after sixteen sessions, especially if it is a fairly complex class like a wizard.

 

[DumbPaladin]

Edit: But I do admit that I'm kind of a hard DM, but not TOO hard IMO. And if I would play in my own games, I would get pissed off sometimes

My question would be more of a philosophical one: What do you think is your highest priority in being the group's DM? What are your responsibilities?

These people -- including the somewhat inept wizard -- all take time out of their lives to come play in a game you run. If none of them bothered, you wouldn't have any of the frustrations (or joys) of being a DM.

Having been the head of an online RP that ran 10 years and is ending this year due to a lack of people showing up regularly anymore, I have to tell you that it's not the best way to have a group cease to meet. I came to realize a long time ago that sometimes, I have to alter my perception to cater to the people who are making my group possible.

If you're bothered by this after this many sessions, it really does sound like it's time to sit him aside for 15 or 30 minutes before or after a session, go over some basic things that are illogical/upsetting/dangerous about his character's decisions -- INCLUDING ways to fix them -- and then go on from there. If he continues to make these mistakes, then they're likely a choice, or some other odd circumstance.

But your players are a commodity. It's best to learn this before they begin to feel unappreciated or undesired and leave.

 

[jonesy]

Some people learn much better by being taught rather than by teaching themselves (by reading about it).

This is an extremely important point. People learn in different ways. Assuming that someone is unwilling to learn, rather than having a hard time learning the hard way, isn't fair to anyone at the table.

 

[KidSnide]

My philosophy is to provide help whenever it makes the game more fun.

If a player is forgetting something that his or her character would clearly know, I'll remind them of that information. I don't think it's fun to screw up because you don't have the full knowledge of a fictional person living in someone else's head. In an ideal world, my players would remember every description I say and my world would be so internally consistent that they would be able to predict events with the same capability as their characters. Peh, I say. Neither me nor my players are so perfect, and so I give guidance about the world when I think it will help.

Similarly, If a player is paralyzed by choice, I'll often clarify what the best options are. This has two benefits: (1) it helps teach the player and (2) it helps speed up the game. If that results in me occasionally telling a player about one clear superior option (and thus, arguably, telling the player what to do), well, I'm willing to pay that price for a more educated player and a faster game.

I understand the philosophy of the neutral judge and I totally get NPCs playing to win. That's all good. You need to be fair, and you want your game to be a challenge. But a fair challenge doesn't mean "no hints." It just means that you need to calibrate difficulty while adjudicating reasonably and consistently. Giving advice is entirely consistent with those objectives.

-KS

 

[Jon_Dahl]

Many of the posters seem to have all the sympathy for this player - which is understandable - but I want to point out that concentrating on the story, NPC's, other players and giving COMPLETE attention to every move this players makes, frankly makes me feel stressed. I feel that I do lot of extra to help this player and since he's not the only player at the table, my brain gets jammed.

Now I feel a bit pissed off because I just noticed that his summons (which he uses lot and so far NPC's never) have casting time of 1 round, not 1 standard action. It seems that he has never bothered about this and since I don't check every single detail what the character does, I have let him cast summon monsters as 1 standard action since that is sort of the default casting time. From now this will change, but it seems that I really have to read every single spell description myself when he uses them and most of the time this will during combat. Which is so annoying YYYYYYYAAAAAARGH! I demand some sympathy too