Ever had that one player who's just on a different wavelength?

[Mayhawk]

I can almost bet that every DM on this list has had a player who fouled up the enjoyment of the game at one time or another.

I recently decided to quit DMing for my group indefinitely because I had similar woes. Now, my wife has taken up the brunt of the DMing duties for our bunch.

I have come to learn that there are some personalities that just aren't compatible for certain gaming styles, and it is best to just get to the heart of the DM understanding his players and vice versa up front. I have run this group at up to 10 players at one time, and we all have diverse styles and reasons for bellying up to the gaming table. I know that I, as a DM, can really only relate to a player who wants to contribute to building the story flavor as much between games as during games. I am not suggesting that players spend 24/7 collaborating to create my world, but I do have certain expectations as a result of gaming with this bunch that I have never had to actually address before now.

I have one player who only plays because her husband plays. I have two more who only show up at the game table when the other plans they make fall through (in other words, my game nights are low on their priority list). The majority of my players have been generally enthusiastic about playing, but I have those few who do inconsiderate things:

1) Consistently show up as late as three hours after game time, disrupting a game now in progress because they absolutely have to get their experience points from last session and buy equipment for this session.

2) Fail to communicate whether they will make a game at all when I ask if they will for purposes of determining whether we will have a game or not or for purposes of planning challenges.

3) Insist that they don't want to do "homework" for the sake of a game. (I would like to see brief character summaries between games to help me to keep track of who should be awarded XPs from game to game. They don't even have to be long. I just need character name, player name, date played, and any noteworthy items the player might think I should know.) And yet badger me for experience points for the last game they played when the last time I saw them was two months ago. Really, if you are going to expect me to put effort into administering your character awards, I expect a little effort on your part as a player, too.

I can relate to the player who would rather hack and slash than role-play. I understand that, since I enjoy setting up combats anyway. I can understand a quiet player who is a bit shy. But, I can't relate to a player who does not want to put a little effort into participating in the game. If it were just one player, I wouldn't be bothered, but it is four, all from the same household.

I am now considering picking up the pieces of the last campaign that I quit running in disgust because of issues like this. And, I have decided to air my grievances up front and propose solutions to them to head stuff like that off at the pass in a series of official "Player etiquette" packets and home game rules that apply to DM/player expectations and how to deal with the administration of the game and exactly how I see things. I have enlisted the help of my wife in drafting documents for our group that will address these issues and the solutions we propose. Some of the onus will be put on the players to live up to my expectations, but there are some responsibilities that I will have as a DM to live up to player expectations as well, such as if I am expecting a character summary sheet from players in order to award experience points, then I have to respond in a timely manner with feedback on the summary sheet. All that said, knowing that I can't be the only DM who feels that if I am putting effort into creating an enjoyable night of gaming, there should be some return and consideration from players, when I have completed my documents (essentially, DM/player contracts, if you will), I would be glad to share the fruits of my labors to help other DMs out there solve similar problems. If you're interested, you can e-mail me privately at mayhawk@mindspring.com

 

[Krail Stromquism]

Ugh!

What a pain some people can be! Im sorry that anyone has to go thru stuff like this.

The brunt of these situations lies in the hands of the DMs, if your player is a schmoe, a hack n slasher, a bad role player or whatever its up to you to diffuse the situations.

Every player has their strong and weak points, try to emphasize their strong points. Help them find their place.

Player discipline is another matter, Tar, I would have one talk with that guy then Invite him to find a different game. Thats the nice way of getting fired, your boss invites you to find a new place to work. The way you describe it too, is strange. Do the players suggest broad nonspecific actions "We'll offer to buy the ship" and "We threaten him" I wouldnt allow those sorts of obtuse actions. If he wants to offer to buy the ship then ask him exactly what hes doing. Put him there, on the ship. "You walk along the heavy grating leading to the Capts Quarters, your boots clank as you go over the conversation you plan with gruff Dwarven Capt and debate over whether or not to compliment his beard, or maybe you shouldve brought the bottle of rot gut. Crewmen pass you smirking as you mumble lines over and over to yourself 'YOUR beard loooks great today' no, no... ' your BEARD looks full today. new conditioner?' not right.

The obtuse overture kind of action keeps the player in the real world, forcing them into the game world will help them get involved and pay better attention, have them use their skills and whatnot. Forced Emersion. It goes a long way.

but I'd still kick that guy out, HOW RUDE! (C3-PO)

 

[Zandy]

I had to register JUST for this subject....

grrrrrr!

I DM/play with a group that has 6 pretty good role-players, and one who just insists on sitting on his PC hands.... He prefers the monk type, and every char he plays is similar.

We finally got him to play a ranger a few years ago. In my campaign, the druid guild would send him messages with a skunk, figuring that their messages would get through without anyone bothering it. The whole group knew that when a skunk came in the room, it was for the ranger.

I like to rotate which PC is the major focus of a session, and I figured I'd try ONCE AGAIN to give him the glory for the day, and make him get into it other than just rolling dice. So the druid guild got attacked by some vampires, and to summon all their members, EVERY SKUNK in the area sprayed at the same time. The town STUNK TO HIGH HEAVEN!

He sat there without any reaction. Since I'm the type of DM who will let the group fail if they miss a clue, I just sat there, but steaming the whole time that he could be so ignorant of his character that he couldn't put 2 and 2 together. After a few minutes, the rest of the group, as incredulous as I was, pretty much jumped him at the same time and explained what must be happening.

"Oh."

The point of all this? Sometimes you just can't drag a player into the role-playing end of it. As DM, cater to the players who WANT that. The lumps in the group will either learn to play along, or be happy with the dicing part of it all.

If they are friends (as in my example above), just be happy to have some time to hang together, and learn to live with it yourself...

 

[Pielorinho]

Tar, you may have just been summarizing when you described the game as:

Player: We offer to buy the ship.
DM: He isn't interested in selling.

but if you're not, I think I can see where part of the problem comes from. Here's how I'd handle it:

Player: We offer to buy the ship.
DM: Well, you know he's probably down in the lounge right now -- he likes to hang out there when there's not a crisis. What do you do?
Player: We offer to buy the ship, I said!
DM: Right now, you're in your quarters. Are you planning on talking with him by intercom?
Player: (Sigh) No. We go down to the lounge.
DM: Okay. The place is pretty dull now -- you see some of the crew that you know, over in a corner playing IceChess. And that creepy Yuan-Ti chick is drinking one of her egg-drinks. Her tongue flicks out in your direction as you enter, and then she turns back to her drink, but as usual it's hard to tell whether she's looking at you. The captain is standing behind the ice-Chest players. He looks up at you, and you can tell that his smile is forced, but he doesn't say anything.
Player: I offer to buy his ship.
DM: What do you say?
Player: Err...Hey, Cap! I wanted to talk with you about buying your ship!
DM: (in a grizzled voice) "What?! You want to buy the HMS Pinafive?! Haw Haw Haw! You're crazy!"

I think that if you actually play through such scenes, it won't seem like railroading. If you just summarize them, though, it can definitely come across as a no-choice plot.

Furthermore, summaries aren't nearly as much fun, when there's something high-stakes on the line. If you RP through the scene, then strange possibilities may crop up: perhaps you'll find yourself, in the voice of the captain, offering to put in a word for the crew with his Pilot's Guild if they'll escort his no-good bookworm son to a military academy, and you'll have a whole new plot thread opening up.

Just an idea. As for the OP, consider giving a +2 circumstance bonus to attacks and skill checks that are described interestingly. That is, a PC who says, "I hit him with my mace!" doesn't get a bonus, but one who says, "I watch him carefully, and as soon as he strikes out at me, I step in, pushing his shield wide with my own shield and striking hard at his jaw," gets the bonus.

Alternatively, award experience points in private, and tell players ahead of time that you'll be giving out nonspecific bonuses to folks that describe their actions dramatically. This is actually what I'm doing in my own campaign now; we'll see how effective it is.

Good luck!
Daniel

 

[mtbdm]

Mish-mash

I've got an "odd man out" in my campaigns. The vast majority of the players want simple, medieval, "Tolkien-esque" campaigns; not this guy. He always wants trans-planar travel or spelljamming or some sort of sci-fi stuff involved; preferably, he likes to have all of the above in one big "mish-mash" setting. Now I, personally, am not against using those elements in some campaigns but using them in every campaign would get a bit tedious for me and the other players (two of them actively detest any hint of "mish-mash", wanting only pure, unadulterated fantasy).

This guy also has trouble keeping player knowledge from interfering with his character's actions. It is often rather annoying to describe a creature only to have its name, stats and weaknesses blurted out (depite the fact the PC probably wouldn't know them).

If anyone has any ideas on how to better fit this guy in without totally handing him the reins of the campaign, I'm all ears.

 

[Tar Markvar]

Well, honestly, the scene did play out in a summary manner, but mostly because I was caught off-guard by the idea of them trying to take over the ship. The "offending player" co-GMs D&D sometimes, so he knew the level of the captain and that the party could pretty easily kill him; I'm not accusing him of twinking or anything, but the thought crossed my mind. But the whole thing didn't occur to me for a number of reasons.

1) The PCs each have ~80k credits. The ship, if bought new from someone who WANTS to sell it to you, would have cost over 5 MILLION credits. Keep in mind that this captain loves his ship and hates the PCs.

2) The captain was nice enough to ferry them from adventure to adventure, even though he had no choice in them originally appearing on the ship.

3) Killing the captain would alienate the crew, leaving five Dragonstar newbies stranded on a strange planet with a ship, but no one to fly/maintain it.

When he announced his plans, it smacked of such twinkery that my first reaction was to try to stomp it. That's a bad reaction, but I knew in my heart that what he wanted to do was not only silly and nigh-impossible, it would also derail the adventure I put so much work into. I was suddenly improvising dwarven resistance bigwigs, trying to find a way to still tie the PCs into the adventure as written, and all that, and my brain short-circuited. He got pissy and got out the headphones, and I got offended and insecure. The rest of the night went as described above.

I know that being more open-minded would have helped. The advice on playing things n more detail is good advice, and I'll definitely keep that in mind for the next time. The problem is that whenever someone starts going into "Your feet clang on the latticed streel grating on the floor as you debate the options in your head etc." type of description, he writes it off as "flavor text" and metagames.

One too many issues of KoDT, I suppose.

 

[Nail]

Heh.

Well, honestly, the scene did play out in a summary manner, but mostly because I was caught off-guard by the idea of them trying to take over the ship. .........But the whole thing didn't occur to me for a number of reasons.......<snip>

Sounds like this is where yer problem is: Ya didn't expect it (which is fine), and then ya got personally involved in th' outcome. An' hey, wha'd'ya know, th' emotions come out, a fight starts, an' someone comes away th' loser. Since yer th' DM, usually the loser is th' player.

Now, we don't know all o' th' conversation, DM-description, etc, but it seems that the way th' player might of taken it is: "Hey, the DM jus' doesn't want me ta do it...I'm bein' railroaded." heck, he as much as said so.

Maybe a better way o' handling it is makin' sure you, as DM, pop in and out of NPC-character from time to time, so th' player knows that what the NPC says and what the DM says is different. .....Works fer our group, anyway. Th' DM is not personally invested in what th' players do....hey, it's their choice.

Fer help with this, get another NPC involved in th' discussion, Maybe even on the PC's side o' the arguement. That way you, as DM, aren't implicitly assumed to be takin' sides.

Ideas to chew on, at any rate. An' don't blame all o' this on the "Roll- vs. Role-" player divide. That's an old, tired topic, with no good resolution.


-Nail

 

[Lela]

DM:You see before you a red dragon, it's eyes blazing at you and about to eat you. it smiles and says "You have one wish mortal, make it and if i am feeling generous, I may grant it"

ME: I WISH FOR MY SOUL BACK!!!

Other PCs: YOU DO WHAT?!?!?!?

LOL!!! Just picture the looks on their faces! Jeeese!!! Oh, I gotta do that!


And, no, I'm not 15 (or anywhere around there for that matter). I'm just immature.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Tar, please realize that I am not trying to excuse the player for putting on headphones and playing with a laptop during your game. That's definitely rude.

But you yourself said that you only summarized the encounter with the gruff captain, and basically said "No, you can't do that. He hates you." That's very frustrating to players. Players want to feel that their actions have consequences, and even if they're bad consequences, so what?

In that situation, I would have let them do what they wanted: role-play the bargaining session where they try to buy the ship. If they ended up in a fight with the captain and his crew, all the better. They'd get to the coveted hack n' slash faster! If they win, and end up stranded on strange world...well, what's wrong with that? When PCs strand themselves on a strange world they try to solve the problem themselves...it's much better than the DM deciding that the next adventure will involve being stranded, and that this one involves taking a ship away from some formians (couldn't looting a formian hive be considered looting a dungeon?).

So they're stranded...you've already decided that there's a hive of formians nearby who know how to fly and maintain these ships. The PCs would have to be creative in either parlaying with or simply forcing the formians to help them. Everyone wins: you get to use the material you created, and the PCs get to feel like there is some course of action available to them besides the ones you've already decided upon.

I'm offering this alternate view since I think people are being very harsh in saying, "kick him out." If you kick everyone out of your game who has different ideas from you, the game will get real stale real fast. I also notice that, in your posts, you claim not to be "railroading" the players, but you also worry that the PCs actions will "derail" your adventure. Well, is your adventure on the rails or can it go in other directions?

In short...if the PCs are willing to be creative and make up weird, silly, impossible plans, then consider yourself lucky to have players who are willing to use their imaginations. Too many players are content to sit back and let the DM lead them by the nose, stumbling into every ambush, trap and plot hook along the way. Sure, make them feel the consequences of their actions! But instead of thinking of it as "derailment," use their ideas as springboards for your own: "Okay, they've made a horrible blunder and stranded themselves...how does this affect their interactions with the formians?"

But if the PCs make the effort to "wing it," then you have a responsibility as DM to do the same thing. As DM, you must entertain. I suspect that this player's rudeness was born of frustration...if there's no way to affect the plotline, why bother trying?

 

[Pielorinho]

The problem is that whenever someone starts going into "Your feet clang on the latticed streel grating on the floor as you debate the options in your head etc." type of description, he writes it off as "flavor text" and metagames.

One too many issues of KoDT, I suppose.

Get a copy of KoDT out, point at Bob, and say, "Bad Bob! Bad! No experience for Bob!"

Actually, I tend to think that too much purple prose in a game can bog it down. Ideally, you can get one or two details that really set the scene -- a smell, a beam of light arcing through the forest's leaves, the sound of cockroaches scurrying through the piles of guano. Too much description can make people tune out.

Dialogue, however, is very involving -- especially if there's a lot at stake, or if the dialogue is sort of funny. Although I've had players take a back seat during conversations, I don't think I've ever seen the person who instigates the conversation get bored.

My tips on dialogue:
-If it's a routine conversation, ask if handwaving it is okay. Only do so if both player and DM agree to do so.
-Never handwave important conversations. If there's the potential for tension, go for it.
-Don't be afraid to make a fool of yourself. Use different voices -- growls, falsettos, and everything in between -- in addition to accents, catch phrases, snorts, giggles, exaggerated gestures, and anything else you can think of. Not only will it entertain your players, it'll maybe even encourage them to do likewise.
-Don't be afraid to blurt stuff out during conversation. I've had totally unexpected side quests come up from things I said while improvising an NPC's speech. It's fun.

Way I see it, combat is fun, and conveys excitement and danger really well. Conversation isn't usually as high-stakes (not usually), but it can convey a much greater range of emotion, from grief to hilarity, and should be just as involving as combat.

Daniel