Discouraging Spotlight Hogging

[Rystil Arden]

We're having the same problem at my table -- and looking for a solution ourselves.
If you figure anything out, pm our DM!

Part of the problem with us, at least, is that it's very hard to focus the adventure on the other players -- any problem presented would tend to get shared out amongst the group, at which point the natural solutions (get more information, talk to the problem presenter) rear their ugly head.

The problem isn't just that the 'face' and 'sneak' are hogging the spotlight; to a degree it's also that they're very protective of that spotlight and unwilling to share in the results of it.
An analogy might be the second edition rogue who keeps filching treasure while scouting, but without all the in-character gripes that go along with it.

Now that I think about it, that might be a great way to settle the problem: Give the "share and share alike" players most of a clue, and toss the non-sharey ones the remainder; make it after-the-fact obvious that sharing that clue originally would have been more helpful than whatever the outcome of not-having-gotten-it would have been.

Of course, that might work better in novels than games.

(I'm being tongue in cheek: the OP is my DM and I'm a grumpy fighter. We really are friends with the spotlight hogs and just wanna play the game with them!)

Aha! I knew there was a grumpy fighter involved somehow!

I agree that splitting the clue, or giving clues that the info gatherer needs to have analysed by another player with a different knowledge skill or such, could be quite helpful. Also, I'm not convinced that it would be impossible to make a plot that did not highlight a different character in roleplaying--if the major NPCs are the left-out PCs' friends and family, they don't want to talk to Beth's Akashic.

 

[Umbran]

A few extra thoughts...

Note that stats and skills are not the only things controlling how NPCs interact with the party, and these can be controlled somewhat with situational modifiers. Maybe the tavern wench talks freely with men, but has no time for other women. Or the big-bad barbarian has no use for weakling little akashics, and so on. Also, as others have noted, NPCs may not react favorably to the face aggressively cutting in to existing conversations. The NPCs have wills of their own, apply them as you see fit.

It is very difficult to gather information when you know nothing about the topic. Make some of the information rather specific to subjects which are gibberish to the Beguiler.

If the beguiler's invisibility + charm tactic has worked so often that she dominates, that suggests to me you aren't putting much variability into the scenes you design. Any time a character depends upon a single mode of operation, they risk life and limb. Make it clear that going solo like this all the time is risky. Why don't her targets ever make the Will save on the charm? Are you enforce the rule in which making the save alerts the target that something is up?

 

[moritheil]

I hate to go all Beth McCoy, but . . . paranoia is the proper answer to spotlight-hogging.

Are your players wary when they interact with people, or are they utterly without fear? It sounds like they want to hog the spotlight that way because there is virtually no risk. It shouldn't be that way. A wrong word in front of certain people can mean doom for the party (or at least, for a player) just as much as opening a trap door can.

Let them know that you're going to implement such dangers, and see if they still fall over each other trying to hog all the interaction.

 

[Sqwonk]

You could try splitting the party up every so often -- have misisons where the two spotlighters go do one thing and the others do something else. This might help establish some equal time-sharing that'll last after the mission splits.

I don't have a good answer -but with a party split there is less "spot-light time" to share.
As a player I hate frequent party splits - trying to pretend your doesn't know what happened durint the split. ugh. Usuallly party splitters know when they have "split" for a long time and make an effort to return. If the 2 hoggs get split off they might spend the whole game session doing their own thing.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't have a good answer -but with a party split there is less "spot-light time" to share.
As a player I hate frequent party splits - trying to pretend your doesn't know what happened durint the split. ugh. Usuallly party splitters know when they have "split" for a long time and make an effort to return. If the 2 hoggs get split off they might spend the whole game session doing their own thing.

So make the split permanent. Run the hoggs one night (and anyone else willing to play with them) and the rest another night; rinse, repeat, and you suddenly have a two-party game. Simple...if you have the time.

Lanefan

 

[Chimera]

Semi-hijack...

Maybe I'm missing something. How does Invisible + Charm Person work when CP is a V,S spell (ie, they should hear the caster even if they can't see them, which should be a bit freaky in some situations*); even if the casting of the spell didn't negate the invisibility, which it should, as you are targeting another person.

Plus the whole Will Save thing Umbran mentioned.

* Do they say "Hey, where's that voice coming from?", then completely forget about it as they become obsessed with their new friend? Don't spellcasters get a chance to identify the spell as they hear it? "Hey, someone's casting a charm! Hey, I suddenly really like Whoever! Wow, obviously no connection there!"

/end semi-hijack.


Several other good points were made too, about the rudeness of the hogs to jump into a conversation between others - and how NPCs should react to that rather than just accept it and transfer their conversation to the hog; and how some NPCs should, by preference, desire to talk to people other than just the two hogs.

 

[Chimera]

Regarding that last point...

I often have NPCs approach a party member that they think is appropriate, rather than just the face.

While the Bard was spending the evening being bored to death by the Tribal Elder (who 'knew' all sorts of stuff about the outside world even though she'd never been outside her own tribe), the teenage boy who'd seen things when he snuck off alone at night approached the tall blond Ranger woman.

The tough warrior who asks questions is addressed as the leader, not sidestepped for the Bard or the Cleric.

As someone else said, the strong warrior may not desire to speak to the weakling scholar or arcanist.

Part of it, as some above have said, is on you as the GM to have NPCs approach different people in the party according to their needs. Heck, some of them may be extremely insulted if someone else barges into the conversation. "I'm not talking to YOU, Wizard. One more word and I'll cut your throat!"

 

[arscott]

I don't have a good answer -but with a party split there is less "spot-light time" to share.
As a player I hate frequent party splits - trying to pretend your doesn't know what happened durint the split. ugh. Usuallly party splitters know when they have "split" for a long time and make an effort to return. If the 2 hoggs get split off they might spend the whole game session doing their own thing.

It worked out okay at my table. According to one of my players, one of the things that makes my games so fun is that I make sure that everyone is contributing to the adventures.

On the other hand, my characters can call eachother on their cellphones or radios, so issues of who-knows-what don't really come up that much. And If I were running a more traditional dungeon oriented game, then I'd be slightly more hesitant to encourage split.