Dealing with lame duck characters

[Elf Witch]

Can anyone explain to me the allure of playing a lame duck PC? By this I don't mean choosing some less optimal choices but actually not being good at what your class it supposed to be good at. For example we are starting a new campaign and the lame duck character concept is a high strength wizard who believes casting any offensive magic is bad and leads to a god complex. He wants this wizard to be into fighting bare handed but is not willing to take feats or look at multiclassing options to be any good at bare hand fighting. This player just loves these characters and plays them all the time. It drives the powergamers around the bend and even non power games like me get annoyed because it really weakens the party as a whole.

I am asking trying to figure out the allure of why so maybe we can help design a character that he will enjoy that actually is not a drain on the party?

Kicking him out of the group is not an option he is a friend and we play at his house.

I have tried to get him to verbalize why he enjoys them so much and all he can say is he hates Mary Sue style characters in his fiction and in his games and that he likes the idea of the ordinary hero who does great things in spite of being ordinary as opposed to Superman. There has to be away to simulate that without being such a handicap on the party.

 

[Morrus]

Sounds like you have a role player on your hands! Different people get different things out of D&D. This is, of course, a feature not a bug.

I'm somewhat surprised that you would kick him out if you weren't playing at his house.

Why can't the DM just slightly reduce the challenges? Then the problem disappears and everyone gets to have fun. Throw in a few fun situations he would enjoy, and bingo!

I say all the above on the assumption he's not just deliberately being obtuse. In which case it's a tricky social problem with causes that go beyond D&D.

 

[Cristian Andreu]

As someone who plays pretty much the same kind of characters as your player every time I have the chance (one of my all-time favourite PCs, Gundersonn the Dwarf Mage and Connoisseur, was almost exactly as the PC you describe, just that he avoided offensive spells because he considered magic an art and not a weapon, thus always had his ass handed over in fisticuffs), I am entirely partial in his favour! Of course, since I have to DM 97% of the times, I don't get to play as much these days...

With that in mind, I'm of the same opinion as the Guvnor: That player's preferences are a feature you should be trying to exploit!

It's important to consider lame duck characters are not always weak for the sake of it, but rather as a result of a concept the player wants to embody that just happens to be weak. For example, a Don Quixote kind of character (which reminds me of the technophone Quixotic Jedi I played in Star Wars d6 who used a bronce blade in space and was sure his robotic hand was out to kill him) would most likely be weak, but as a function of the central concept (an out-of-touch noble who thinks he's a knight from the olden days and acts accordingly).

On the other hand, weakness is a great source of drama, and some players enjoy that; it also forces you to be creative.

So unless the player is purposely making weak PCs to somehow piss off the rest of the group (though from what you describe doesn't seem to be the case), I think you need to consider his playstyle as equally valid and try to work with it rather than despite of it. If it's really throwing a wrench into your story's gears (as some groups prefer a more power-gaming style, which is perfectly acceptable) and his character types clash with everyone else's, it might be a case of such different playstyles that you can't play together.

But honestly, I think you would be wasting a great opportunity kicking this guy out. Ask him to help you fit his characters into the story, and I'm certain you'll have a lot of fun; being surprised by what your players do is where the true joy of DMing is at, I think!

 

[Elf Witch]

Sounds like you have a role player on your hands! Different people get different things out of D&D. This is, of course, a feature not a bug.

I'm somewhat surprised that you would kick him out if you weren't playing at his house.

Why can't the DM just slightly reduce the challenges? Then the problem disappears and everyone gets to have fun. Throw in a few fun situations he would enjoy, and bingo!

I say all the above on the assumption he's not just deliberately being obtuse. In which case it's a tricky social problem with causes that go beyond D&D.

To be honest I think at this point many would rather not play with him. We are a heavy role playing group and it is not that we are opposed to the idea of an ordinary man style hero. But there has to be away to build that without being so lame that you can't contribute at all. Take combat there are plenty of ways to cast defensive spells to help your party or yourself. But he charges in to combat with his wizard hit points to try and go toe to toe with the bad martial guys just with his fists which if you don't take the feat for fighting barehanded that is an attack of opportunity so he is usually knocked unconscious pretty quickly leaving the rest of us to deal with the combat and we are small party of four.

He says that because his wisdom is only a 10 that is why he doesn't learn that charging in is not a wise thing to do. He falls heavily into Robin Laws method actor. He is all about his character and staying in character. Which is not bad but there are times you need to think about the party too.

I know before he joined our group he played with people who placed optimized at all costs over role playing and that has left him rather prickly about anything we say. Like okay how about taking a feat that allows your wizard to fight barehanded without provoking attacks of opportunity. How about casting buffs on yourself how about multi classing with a class with higher hit points. He I think tends to see suggestions like that as powergaming like he used to get from his old group and his resistant to them.

My son plays in his old group and I know how they are my son is always teasing me about my lame characters everyone in that group are powergamers and tacticians role playing takes a backseat to that. He was a poor fit with that group which is why I invited him to play in our group. But he can't seem to fit in our group either we don't mind that he is not Superman but we don't want him to be Joxer the mighty either how about someone in between.

 

[Morrus]

To be honest I think at this point many would rather not play with him.

Form what you say, you've tried talking to him. He's doing nothing wrong, but if you wish to exclude him, and the GM is adamant that they won't adjust the encounters to suit the slightly weaker party, you should just be up-front about it and tell him.

Of course, without him you'll be just as weak as you were with him, so I'm not sure how that helps things.

 

[Elf Witch]

As someone who plays pretty much the same kind of characters as your player every time I have the chance (one of my all-time favourite PCs, Gundersonn the Dwarf Mage and Connoisseur, was almost exactly as the PC you describe, just that he avoided offensive spells because he considered magic an art and not a weapon, thus always had his ass handed over in fisticuffs), I am entirely partial in his favour! Of course, since I have to DM 97% of the times, I don't get to play as much these days...

With that in mind, I'm of the same opinion as the Guvnor: That player's preferences are a feature you should be trying to exploit!

It's important to consider lame duck characters are not always weak for the sake of it, but rather as a result of a concept the player wants to embody that just happens to be weak. For example, a Don Quixote kind of character (which reminds me of the technophone Quixotic Jedi I played in Star Wars d6 who used a bronce blade in space and was sure his robotic hand was out to kill him) would most likely be weak, but as a function of the central concept (an out-of-touch noble who thinks he's a knight from the olden days and acts accordingly).

On the other hand, weakness is a great source of drama, and some players enjoy that; it also forces you to be creative.

So unless the player is purposely making weak PCs to somehow piss off the rest of the group (though from what you describe doesn't seem to be the case), I think you need to consider his playstyle as equally valid and try to work with it rather than despite of it. If it's really throwing a wrench into your story's gears (as some groups prefer a more power-gaming style, which is perfectly acceptable) and his character types clash with everyone else's, it might be a case of such different playstyles that you can't play together.

But honestly, I think you would be wasting a great opportunity kicking this guy out. Ask him to help you fit his characters into the story, and I'm certain you'll have a lot of fun; being surprised by what your players do is where the true joy of DMing is at, I think!

Let me ask you this what possible role playing reason would a party have to keep a member who is a danger to himself to the party and sucks up the limited resource of healing? That is a question that we ask a lot and the only answer we have come up with is because it is a game and he is the player. So basically his choice to play these lame ducks in such a horrible way is impacting on our role playing because we are the ones that have to come up with a reason to keep him around. There is nothing wrong with playing a wizard who does not use offensive magic I played a sorcerer who didn't kill. I played her as a party support style mage. I buffed and made the party stronger that way. I Id magic items and cast spells like web, sleep, grease, slow.

I don't have an issue that he is playing an elf with 18 strength as a wizard when he first brought up the concept I was like okay cool she is a wizard who likes to use her fists fine then at least be good at it or at least decent in using your fists. Sooner or later the character is going to die the only reason she has not is the DM pulls punches and fudges rolls not to kill the PC. I DM a lot myself and while I do believe in fudging now and then I don't believe that my job as DM is to bend over backwards to keep a PC alive. I would not as DM nor is the DM targeting him with biggest bad guy he is choosing to run up to them.

Sometimes it feels like he only is thinking of his fun and no one else.

 

[Elf Witch]

Form what you say, you've tried talking to him. He's doing nothing wrong, but if you wish to exclude him, and the GM is adamant that they won't adjust the encounters to suit the slightly weaker party, you should just be up-front about it and tell him.

Of course, without him you'll be just as weak as you were with him, so I'm not sure how that helps things.

like I said he is a friend and while we are at the point that he is impacting a lot of our fun the idea of hurting his feelings does not sit well with us either. Actually I don't think we would be weaker because at least our very limited healing would not be going to him every combat. We play in a low magic game and our healing comes in the form of spells from the cleric and the goodbery we barter for with the druids.

 

[Morrus]

like I said he is a friend and while we are at the point that he is impacting a lot of our fun the idea of hurting his feelings does not sit well with us either. Actually I don't think we would be weaker because at least our very limited healing would not be going to him every combat. We play in a low magic game and our healing comes in the form of spells from the cleric and the goodbery we barter for with the druids.

So you're no weaker with or without him. But he's your friend and you enjoy his company. I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I don't see the problem, then. How is his fun reducing yours?

 

[Kite474]

...... You ever consider just letting his character die? I mean if your in do or die game its gonna come up eventually. After that he can roll up a character more in line with the party and alls well.

As for why people roll lame duck characters. I think its because they have a desire to be something unique. In a novel they would be a beloved character. In a table top game they area liability because at the end of the day this is still a game built upon a series of systems. Some ideas just do not mesh well with said systems.

If you can have a talk about your grievances. If he still is up to the same antics and none of you can bear it, it may be time to find a new place

 

[Elf Witch]

So you're no weaker with or without him. But he's your friend and you enjoy his company. I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I don't see the problem, then. How is his fun reducing yours?

It is causing tension at the table. It is not fun for the rest of us to have to do all the heavy lifting. There have been times where we really needed the skills a wizard has and we have failed at the mission and almost faced a TPK because of it. We like our characters to and we want to them to succeed and live.

I came here hoping to find some advice on how to talk to talk to him to get an understanding on why he enjoys playing characters like this. While I am no powergamer I don't understand playing a character like this I don't understand the enjoyment he gets from it so I don't know how to talk to him about it. I would like to find a compromise where he can have some of his fun but we have fun too. I am starting to dread the after session emails that start flying fast and furious.

It is frustrating that we have to struggle so hard to accomplish things because one member is not really contributing anything but chaos. The Elf when not fist fighting in combat is getting drunk in taverns and starting fights and getting thrown in jail or being rude to the city guard or the mayor. The character concept is a drunken elf who got kicked out of wizard school and is angry at the world. Again that could be a cool concept if she was good at one thing and that one thing is why we put up with her otherwise obnoxious behavior.

Both the DM and I have said to him look is there anyway you would be willing to tone it down a little or at least make your elf good in combat so all that tavern brawling comes in and makes you a decent fighter in combat. The DM offered to let him rebuild so he could take the feat unarmed combat she also offered to let him redo his hit points and just take max at every level something the rest of us agreed to even though we don't get to do that because at least it woulds give him a chance to actually survive the concept he wants to play. But he sees all that as min maxing powergaming.

It is like there is a gulf that we can't seem to bridge on what for example min maxing and powergaming is.