How to stop player whining? Drama!

[Mesh Hong]

I just think it's hilarious when people say things like, "my PC gets screwed". That's part of the game. The challenge is to try and not get screwed, duh. That's why it's a "game". It's like whining every time you lose a piece in checkers. I don't get why people act like that about D&D. And most of the time it's over some piddly thing that won't have any long term or serious effect, like getting stunned for 4 rounds or something. Oh no, that's really "getting screwed". Players like that don't know the meaning of getting screwed. I'd hate to see how they'd act if they dealt with some of the BS my characters went through.

I'm totally using the checkers reference if he "gets screwed" again.

Honestly I really wouldn't use that analogy. Chequers and an RPG are completely different and it isn't the type of remark that will help the situation.

Again I am going to chip in and look at the situation from the other side of the fence. Most of the posters here seem to just assume the worst of this new person to our hobby but I want to understand him and help all the parties involved adapt and continue with what they say is a brilliant game.

From the sound of it he is used to games where you control multiple pieces towards an overall defined goal and can achieve a victory (Wargaming and Magic). Roleplaying doesn't have the same structure, fixed end point or victory condition.

In a wargame situation you might be prepared to "lose" the skirmish on your left flank because it serves a greater purpose in your greater battle plan. In an RPG you have one character, and as such "victory" or "defeat" rests solely in its hands. That means that any set back your one piece has can have a major effect and reduce its chance of "winning".

Now I realise that I am using dangerous terms such as "winning", but in all honesty that is probably what the person in question is thinking about. His comment about his character getting screwed over might point us in the direction that he feels that there is a competition between himself and the DM (it fits his previous gaming experience, so why wouldn't he?). He also seems to be complaining about areas of the game for which there are no definite systems or rules, again this is not what he is used to (in a wargame or magic every part of the game has set rules that can be studied, understood and exploited by expert players).

Taking the "fire incident" (where his character unpredictably lost 2 potions) to him it could be analogous to half way through a game of magic his opponent suddenly flips through his deck and takes out 5 cards that are important to the functioning of his decks theme, suddenly putting him at a disadvantage from something he had no way of predicting.

The resolution here is probably a long road. Roleplaying disputes can usually be boiled down to trust, Players must trust that the DM will not "screw them over" (putting it bluntly) and a DM must trust that his players will act in the spirit of the system or setting. Trust is something that is hard won and easily lost, so telling the person that "you are the type of person that whines when they lose a piece in chequers" is both inappropriate and overly adversarial.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

How to stop player whining?

Coup de grace- that'll shut him up.









What?

 

[Janx]

the checkers analogy, as MH suggests isn't the same.

In checkers, if you loose a piece, you made a mistake, and you'll never get it back. It has impact on the rest of the game.

In an RPG, the GM makes setbacks like fires and losing potions happen arbitrarily.

Furthermore, he sort of expects that you'll do stuff in the game to get it back or even better.

Consider that this is why you get XP in D&D and not in Checkers.

Setbacks are how the DM introduces challenges for the PC to overcome. They're not fair. Whereas the rules in other games generally start out both sides evenly.

 

[Rel]

I'm late to the conversation and it sounds like it might be resolved in a favorable manner, so that's good. But I wanted to give a tad of input about adversity from somebody who is an avowed Rat Bastard DM.

I screw over the PC's in my games frequently, unashamedly and royally.

It's not because I don't like my players (who are all extremely good friends of mine). It's not because their PC's have done something terribly wrong (although sometimes they do and then I screw them over extra). It's not because I'm a sadistic bastard who lives to see them fail. Quite the opposite actually.

It's because it is INTERESTING.

What could be more boring than a tale in which everything goes right for the protagonists? If you never have to overcome adversity then you're not really a hero. And the greater the odds stacked against you the bigger the thrill when you overcome them.

My ultimate goal whenever I'm running a game is to dial the "disaster-o-meter" up just as high as I think I can without a guaranteed TPK. And 99% of the time the players rise to the occasion and pull through. It's because they are resourceful, smart and sometimes a little lucky. But mostly it's because they are working together. And watching them high five each other when one of them crits the BBEG, who burned down the inn and, yes, even caused the destruction of TWO out of THREE of their potions of Cure Light Wounds (the horror!), is pretty much the pinnacle of gaming IMHO.

The other beauty of running things like this is what Piratecat calls "fluffy towels". It's the part of the game where things just go right for the PC's for no reason other than I want to remind them that it can happen. They stop at an inn for the night. No assassins attack. The place doesn't burn down. Their horses don't get stolen.

Instead the innkeeper has heard of them as heroes and gives them free rooms. They get hot baths drawn by comely wenches who leave cold ale in big mugs by the tubs. And when they get out of the bath they dry themselves with towels that they find to be exceptionally soft and fluffy.

It totally messes with their minds.

 

[CharlesRyan]

It's like whining every time you lose a piece in checkers.

Actually, it's like whining when the protagonist in the movie you're watching gets beaten up or captured by the bad guys or has his first plan foiled.

If these things didn't happen, the movie would be really boring. And short.

As Rel said, setbacks are what make the game interesting.

It sounds to me like maybe this guy's problem isn't really with the rules--it's with the victory conditions. As in, he has a mindset that he's trying to "win" the game, so when he suffers a setback--especially a setback that is related to perceived vagueness in the rules--he feels screwed. That's normal--we all feel screwed when we lose a game because of a rule that was vague or poorly explained.

I bet the guy does NOT whine when he loses a piece in checkers--because that loss seems fair. He probably doesn't whine while losing MtG, either. There's no perceived unfairness when the rules are clear from the outset.

Even when playing strictly RAW, RPGs are based on subjective calls and the GM's desire to create challenge. They are inherently unfair, but that's OK, because they aren't about winning. This may be the point that the player needs to come to.

 

[amerigoV]

It's like whining every time you lose a piece in checkers.

Clearly you have never play checkers with kids in Honduras. I was on a church trip to a school/orphanage/foster facility over the summer. Them little buggers had all sorts of made up rules - and its hard to argue when it is 4 of them and I barely speak Spanish. Suddenly it was "no hablo inglese" from the kids. It was not fair then, and its not fare now! Next time, I am taking the rules in English AND Spanish to show them.....

 

[Oryan77]

Honestly I really wouldn't use that analogy. Chequers and an RPG are completely different

Ok fine, Chinese Checkers then.

Taking the "fire incident" (where his character unpredictably lost 2 potions) to him it could be analogous to half way through a game of magic his opponent suddenly flips through his deck and takes out 5 cards that are important to the functioning of his decks theme, suddenly putting him at a disadvantage from something he had no way of predicting.

But this doesn't give him an excuse to be a whiner. If he was my friend, rather than explain things to him in game terms, I would be explaining it to him in real world terms because that is how I approach D&D. Maybe in real life, he doesn't know what warm water can do to a cold glass. And if he goes and pours hot water on his frozen windshield and the glass cracks, well, lesson learned. Obviously he didn't "think" about what might happen.

Same thing with D&D. If he didn't protect his potions from getting damaged, then he didn't "think" about what might happen to them. Lesson learned. It's the same thing as far as I'm concerned.

Now if they are the type of players that approach D&D as "just a game" and don't care about real world logic, then the DM shouldn't be doing things like destroying potions (they don't get destroyed in my video games). If a player can't handle the DM being a little loose with the game world without whining about it, then he shouldn't play in that group. He may need a more strict & streamlined type of D&D game that doesn't focus much on being a working world.

Roleplaying disputes can usually be boiled down to trust, Players must trust that the DM will not "screw them over" (putting it bluntly) and a DM must trust that his players will act in the spirit of the system or setting.

Yep, trust is the most important thing in order to have a great group of players.

The hard part is getting players to understand what being "screwed over" actually means. This thread shows that everyone has their own idea on what it means to get screwed. Some people think getting screwed over means losing a couple of potions. Other people will say getting screwed over means they failed a saving throw and are stunned. Some people will say you aren't screwed unless it is something major that will cause you lots of game time to overcome. And then some will say you only get screwed when the DM has a personal agenda against you and he cheats to cause you problems.

In checkers, if you loose a piece, you made a mistake, and you'll never get it back. It has impact on the rest of the game.

I never make mistakes in checkers & I do get my pieces back! When I lose a piece, it is done on purpose. You'll realize that when my other piece makes it across the board and gets kinged.

It's because it is INTERESTING.

Unfortunately, a lot of players don't see it that way. Are there even cursed magic items in 4e?

I don't tend to play with those type of players because that mindset kinda bugs me. Plus, players that can't find "challenges" like that interesting usually keep the game pretty boring and vanilla. Gearing up, going to the dungeon, and killing the big monster is fun and all. But I can get that from a video game. I play D&D because it is so open ended. I prefer when the adventure is spiced up while I'm going to the cave to kill the monster. And if that means I have to be inconvenienced for a bit, bring it on. I'm a big boy, I can handle it.

A short story here; I can't handle it though if the DM keeps me from getting unscrewed. I had a DM unfairly allow a PC to steal 2 magic items from me. Then when I investigated and set up this elaborate trap for the PC to determine if he did take them and what he did with them (a year later), it surprised the DM and that player. They never saw it coming. Yet, just as I announced that I coup-de-grace him, the DM lamely had this powerful evil sorcerer bossman appear and threatened to kill me if I took that PCs life.

I got screwed once by losing my only 2 magic items, but it was actually fun for me trying to get my revenge so I didn't mind. Then when I thought I was about to get my revenge (it felt great), I was screwed even worse. That wasn't cool. 14 years later and I'm still bitter about it! That was in our old 2e Dark Sun game, and now that DM (he's my best friend) wants to start a 4e Dark Sun game for us. I should remind him about that, it'll give us a good laugh.

he other beauty of running things like this is what Piratecat calls "fluffy towels".

That's an important thing for DMs to keep in mind. For every time a DM "screws" over a character, it really helps that the DM also throws in the fluffy towel just as often.

So if the DM destroys 2 of the PCs potions, maybe he could reward him later with an even better potion.

They are inherently unfair, but that's OK, because they aren't about winning. This may be the point that the player needs to come to.

Yeah, I relate it to real life. Although strangely, I'm actually trying to win real life.

When an 11 y/o girl comes up to me and knocks my Rocky Road ice cream out of my hand and then steps on it, I got screwed. But life is unfair like that. I approach D&D the same exact way. I can't sit there and control every aspect of the game world. So I'm not going to say it's "unfair" that my potions were destroyed. Of course there are exceptions, like DMs that have to cheat to screw you over, and they only screw you over for out of game reasons. But normally, if my PC lost a fight, got captured, and lost all of his gear, oh well, that's life. I'm not going to whine about it (although I might kick the DM in his junk just as he steps into his car).

 

[Doctor DM]

Couple things:

Yes, I would say he definitely has the trying to "win" mindset of us vs. the DM. And I would say he definitely doesn't trust the DM. I'm not really sure how we can make him trust the DM though. Some of the bad things that have happened to him have been semi cheap, but not really horrible. The potions lost in the fire was the worst thing, and that was far from horrendous. Plenty of similar things have happened to other players, and while we're not exactly happy about it (you're not gonna say "YAY! I took 30 damage!"), we realize that things happen, it's part of the game.

Plenty of great things have happened to him as well. He's a Paladin, and the DM gave him Favored Enemy for free. He was able to buy a special high tech pistol for half price. (I had to pay full price for the pistols when I went to the the same shop later. He was just lucky and caught a sale.) He's going to be able to learn some spells by studying this necromancers spellbook he got from a slain villain. He will learn to cast a spell or two, for FREE, not having to take spellcaster levels. So he's far from getting picked on.

I'm very curious to see how this turns out. I'm predicting the problem solved for the most part, but I think there's still gonna be a LITTLE whining. Hopefully we can make him "get it".

 

[LostSoul]

I still think the issue is that he came to the game to play an Undead-Hunting Badass, and when he does things that aren't fitting with the conception he has for his character and he has to deal with the consequences, he gets upset.

I can understand that, since he didn't come to play a game where his Undead-Hunting Badassness was going to be challenged; he wants it reinforced. That's why he's playing.

I bet he would have expected something like this:

DM: The inn burns down.
Player: Oh crap, my potions were in the room! I guess I lost them.
DM: No way, you're a highly-trained Undead-Hunting Badass. Of course you picked them up before you left. No self-respecting Undead-Hunting Badass would have left them in the room!
Player: Yeah, of course. You are an awesome DM, you really understand my character.

 

[Janx]

LostSoul brings up a good point.

The GM chooses to interpret situations a certain way and either chooses an optimal assumption for the PC or a negative one.

If the GM says the inn is on fire, and the PCs say they get and get out, does he assume they grabbed anything? The player didn't specifically say it, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have tried to grab something?

in almost every fire (or fire drill/alarm) people are ALWAYS grabbing stuff on their way out. An adventurer in an inn would most likely grab his backpack (where most his stuff is) and his belt (which has his weapons on it). He'd be more likely to lose his armor, which is probably multiple pieces, and thus unwieldy to carry.

Or the DM could stick to a "if you didn't say it, you didn't do it" mentality. The problem is when this rule is unspoken, and enforced unconsistently.

It sounds like the GM has been generous on some areas, and probably counters that with setbacks in others. The player may not be realizing that losing 100GP in potions is piss in a bucket, compared to being allowed new feats and spells for free.