Advice please: very independent characters!

[Silly]

Hi - I've been lurking here awhile, and been having a lot of fun with this cool forum. I'd like some advice from other DMs out there. Any tips you can give me would be much appreciated.

I've just started running a game (with new players) for the first time in 3 years. I'm an experienced DM but my players in the past have, in general, acted as a cohesive party.

From the first - brief - session, it seems as if one player is likely to keep going off on her own - making lots of independent actions without consulting the rest of the party.

Having been a player in a game that was ruined by one player doing this excessively - the other three players didn't get a look in - I'm very reluctant to let the player run around on her own too much. On the other hand, I don't want to railroad the player either.

So I've got to do something, but what? Deus ex machina in the game (interventions of NPCs and the like to keep her on track)? Having a word with the player and asking her to moderate her character's behaviour? Or should I let her have total freedom of action?

I'd welcome suggestions from anyone who has dealt with this issue.

How much is too much railroading? Is there such a thing as too much freedom?

If you've had a problem with an over-independent player, what was your solution?

 

[Old Fezziwig]

I'd suggest talking to the player and asking her to moderate her character's behavior, especially if you feel like her diversions are going to make the game less fun for others. As for in-game things, I'd avoid them—they'd probably be far too intrusive and obvious as to their intent. You're (probably) going to have to rely on the player's word and hope it holds.

Good luck,
tKL

 

[JoeGKushner]

One interesting piece of advice I've seen in one GMing resource was that this is a game, not a free-form acting theater. While it's important to role play and enjoy your character, this should not come at cost to the whole party.

Have a quick discussion about your issues with the player, ask if he can work more with the group than outside it and try to allow him some time in the spotlight.

 

[jmucchiello]

From the first - brief - session, it seems as if one player is likely to keep going off on her own - making lots of independent actions without consulting the rest of the party.

Talk to the person privately and ask them not to do this because you don't like having the rest of the party twiddling their thumbs while you deal with their character's solo adventuring. Ask the person to arrange with you private time to solo adventure away from the group if that's what is really desired.

If the person complains that it's not fair to not allow him to play his character his way, show the person how unfair it is by running their side trip for like 5 minutes (a shopping trip is great. the person asks if the shopkeep has something and you switch away when the shopkeep says "let me look in the back") and then immediately switching back to the main group and causing major encounter to occur. The other PCs end up in a combat that takes your attention for 30-40 minutes while the other person is out of action. When the fight is done, switch back to the soloist ("I found this in the basement...."). Of course, this solution is a bit passive aggressive so use it with care.

I actually only advocate the first method though. Directly talk to the player. It is the easiest way to avoid misunderstanding.

 

[Delemental]

I've had this happen myself, and it's annoying - from both sides. And I've experienced both sides. But there are two main reasons this happens, in my experience, and you have to handle each differently. You've probably either got a Doombunny or a Camerahog.

Doombunnies are those players who treat D&D like a big computer game. They see the game as either a 1st-person shooter like Doom, or one of those online games like Everquest. Doombunnies run off alone because they want to rack up a few "solo kills" - figuring you as DM will either throw them some easy encounters or would let them escape a tougher situation without consequences. The best thing to do with Doombunnies is enforce natural consequences - let the Doombunny run into the nest of trolls all alone and get pounded, or you could let him get away only to lead the trolls back to the group.

Camerahogs, on the other hand, are just wanting attention. All the world's a stage, they say, and they want to be the star. Camerahogs go solo for the purpose of forcing you to run their own "scene". Here I think the trick is to maintain balance. Give them their moment in the sun, as long as everyone else gets equal time. Also remember that "attention" doesn't have to be positive for the character.

It can be tricky sometimes, because these can both be legitimate gaming styles. But if they're at odds with the rest of the group it's a problem. Finding out what this particular player wants can help a lot.

In my own experience, I once DMed a group that had a Doombunny player who would cast invisibility on himself and wander off. I got lucky here - he wandered away once during an adventure in a large mine complex, which was largely abandoned (the monsters were massed in the lower level). After spending most of the evening doing nothing but falling into pits, his tendency to wander diminished.

As a player, however, I admit to being a Camerahog. However, I also happen to game with a roleplay-intense group, so obviously I can't have all the time to myself. The solution I came up with was to write my own script - writing out little scenes for down-times, travel times, etc. That way I get the character depth and development I want, without taking away time from the game. Plus it gives my DMs more things to pull from as far as background, connections to plots, etc.

 

[Silly]

I've had this happen myself, and it's annoying - from both sides. And I've
experienced both sides. But there are two main reasons this happens, in my experience, and you have to handle each differently. You've probably either got a Doombunny or a Camerahog.

I recognise the player types you describe, but I don't think either category applies in this case. The player in question has never played RPGs before - she doesn't know what to expect. She hasn't really got an idea of how a typical game runs.

The group have already discussed her behaviour with her after the short session we've already played. It was clear she wasn't sure how much freedom she was allowed - and how much is acceptable. I think people enthusiastically telling her "you can do anything you want in D&D" before she played may have had unforseen consequences! I hope the group discussion has helped, but I certainly didn't lay down the law at this stage.

I hope in the next session she will pick up the pace and style of the game, and my campaign in particular. It helps that the other players have all played in my game a lot, so they know - and enjoy - how my games work.

Having said all that, I'm still not really convinced she'll settle in that well without some action from me - hence me asking the question to this forum!

 

[frankthedm]

A permanent death might be a good way for the player to make a new character who 'works well with others'.

 

[Silly]

Thanks everyone for the suggestions so far. As the group has already spoken a little about this with the player, I think I'll see what she's like next session.

If she's still the same I'll have a quiet word about toning down her character.

I think killing her character, as FranktheDM suggests, might be a bit harsh! If she persists in the thieving-type independent actions I think she's planning, she'll do it herself, anyway. First-level PCs who start annoying important NPCs in a city environment are likely to come to a sticky end in my campaign...

Anyway, thanks again for the suggestions - the consensus so far has been to talk to the player, which I'll do if the previous chat didn't get the point across.

 

[Desdichado]

We had a new player do this as well, and it's not for either of the reasons suggested by Delemental as near as I can tell; it's because she was genuinely roleplaying her character, and her character wasn't the type to be cooperative and fall in line with the (Keeper in this case)'s plans. However, as a player in that same game, I actually thought it somewhat refreshing, so I haven't complained about it at all. Maybe that's just me, though. I say give her her time, but make sure everyone has it too. If everyone's tired of twiddling their thumbs waiting for other players, then they can together decide to work more cohesively and not split up. Otherwise, let them all have their fun.

 

[Kichwas]

If talking to the player fails to work consider these options:


1. Cut the player from the game.

2. Focus on the player less - go around the room and ask people what they do and in response to her just give a short summation of what happens and then spend time on those in the group.

3. Give an XP bonus to players who take actions that cause -OTHER- players to be more involved. If you don't want to speed up XP, or you want to make sure this actually works as a penalty to those who don't do it, cut the XP of everything else by a porportional amount, and give that portion back to those who get this reward.


I've found myself doing option three recently to players who's action choices are not that interesting to me... A bad GM habit, but then again these people consistantly answer my 'what are you doing?' with 'just hanging out.' to which they get 'Ok, you hang. Moving on...'