Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SweeneyTodd" data-source="post: 2405162" data-attributes="member: 9391">Dude, let him be Smashdor already. If you're keeping him in the group, give him what he wants. So he's a &quot;cleric&quot; on his character sheet, and maybe in-game he's some kind of one-man Spanish Inquisition witch hunter, or some kind of barbarian witchdoctor, or whatever. You've made it clear he's not interested in the religion part, just the mechanics of the class. You can give him that.I'll tell you what I did when I had a player that I felt was being disruptive by breaking out their schtick all the time. (Boy, that didn't sound right at all.) She was a &quot;lookit me! lookit me!&quot; instead of a &quot;smash the orcs&quot;, but the principle's the same.I worked her schtick as a player into her character's role in the campaign. She liked to instigate trouble (practical jokes and the like) and generally get attention, so I set her character up as someone whose antics would drive the plot. She got to do her thing, the rest of the group got it over with and it led to an interesting scene dealing with the consequences, etc.So let him be Smashdor. The party needs front-line fighters, no worry. If he's all &quot;break down the doors and kick ass&quot;, and there's tension between that and how the rest of the group play, don't pretend it's not true; bring it into the game. Let everybody get a kick and a laugh out of it. &quot;Yeah, Smashdor, you sure did kill those guys dead. I kind of wish you'd given us a chance to question them first...&quot; &quot;NO! They were heretics, they had to burn!&quot; That kind of thing. If there's a tension you can't get rid of, I think making it obvious and not pretending it isn't there is the best approach.But if you deny him the cleric class because he won't play it right, then you're causing friction and problems between real people (players at the table) for the sake of the consistency of an imaginary place (the campaign). That sounds like the wrong way to go for me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SweeneyTodd, post: 2405162, member: 9391"] Dude, let him be Smashdor already. If you're keeping him in the group, give him what he wants. So he's a "cleric" on his character sheet, and maybe in-game he's some kind of one-man Spanish Inquisition witch hunter, or some kind of barbarian witchdoctor, or whatever. You've made it clear he's not interested in the religion part, just the mechanics of the class. You can give him that. I'll tell you what I did when I had a player that I felt was being disruptive by breaking out their schtick all the time. (Boy, that didn't sound right at all.) She was a "lookit me! lookit me!" instead of a "smash the orcs", but the principle's the same. I worked her schtick as a player into her character's role in the campaign. She liked to instigate trouble (practical jokes and the like) and generally get attention, so I set her character up as someone whose antics would drive the plot. She got to do her thing, the rest of the group got it over with and it led to an interesting scene dealing with the consequences, etc. So let him be Smashdor. The party needs front-line fighters, no worry. If he's all "break down the doors and kick ass", and there's tension between that and how the rest of the group play, don't pretend it's not true; bring it into the game. Let everybody get a kick and a laugh out of it. "Yeah, Smashdor, you sure did kill those guys dead. I kind of wish you'd given us a chance to question them first..." "NO! They were heretics, they had to burn!" That kind of thing. If there's a tension you can't get rid of, I think making it obvious and not pretending it isn't there is the best approach. But if you deny him the cleric class because he won't play it right, then you're causing friction and problems between real people (players at the table) for the sake of the consistency of an imaginary place (the campaign). That sounds like the wrong way to go for me. [/QUOTE]

Verification