D&D 5E How to force emotions down your players' throats?

[doctorbadwolf]

He is a Water Genasi Wizard, no alignment or background. He has a bit of backstory, based on him living in the city of Genasi, but it has not come into play much. By the players own description his Character is analytical, and prefers planning over acting in combat. The whole "spend 6 hours sharpening my axe" thing. The issue with this is that both of the others' characters are extremely forward and very much people of action, so while they are in a super intense fight, he will stop everything at his turn to ask tactical questions.

It may be a simple lack of experience, but I feel like he just hasn't grasped how to get in that frame of mind, while the other two hit their stride easily. I can't speak for myself, as I am lackluster at best when role-playing the NPCs, but I don't want him to feel left out of the game.

As far as tropes, the most I can say is maybe. He has chosen all of his characters, and they tend to be either odd or blank. Maybe he is just swinging for the fences, and falling short by trying too hard, but he has yet to be interested in trying any sort of basic cliche or classic trope.

This may sound strange, but maybe he needs some tactical options. Maybe dig into how to support more tactical play without bogging the game down, and he will engage more. I've seen with with at least two players, who wanted to play analytical, tactical characters. 4e was a boon for them, because they could dig into their character's tactical options without having to stop and ask questions OOC. they literally became highly engaged roleplayers over the course of the middle heroic teir, because the game supported the kind of character they wanted to play.

5e can do that as well, but it's less strongly supported.

The point is, perhaps what is needed is to find options that let the character tactically analyze without spending turn time asking OOC tactical questions.

 

[Lanliss]

Gotcha.

Can an you use whatever backstory he has provided, or hasn't provided, to come up with a couple of details you can use to motivate his character? Perhaps he has a sibling who can serve as an ally or enemy. Perhaps his family is gone, wiped out in a villain's attack.

Try ray to give his character clear and easily relatable hooks to latch onto. "This wizard killed your brother" is a pretty easy motivation for folks to grasp. Plus it gives you a memorable villain.

Ok, basic backstory, provided in the form of bullets.

• Family has magic come up every few generations
• Inherited magic books from great-great-grandfather
• Grew up in Nexus, city of the Genasi
• Wants to clear the Chaos from the world, is on a quest to study Chaos, hoping to find it's source

That is pretty much everything he gave me. I know how I can tie in his quest, but we have not reached that point just yet. A major problem is that he has had no real tragedy or problems in his characters life. I suppose I could see if he was interested in playing his Character like a high class city boy thrown into a jungle (basically literally what he is, with the current campaign location).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also, don't try to assign him an alignment. That is just a really bad idea. If he doesn't want one, let him not have one.

 

[Lanliss]

So he's kind of a cold and analytical player, and he's playing a cold and analytic character? I'm not sure what the problem is. I mean, it's kind of taking the easy way out, but it's just as valid of a way to RP than if an action-oriented player had an action-oriented character.

One suggestion that I would make is to definitely go for an alignment, though. Especially for new players, an alignment can serve as a useful tool for figuring out the character's perspective. It sounds like this character is Lawful (plan-oriented), and most parties tend toward Good (unless you're specifically playing an Evil campaign), so make the character Lawful Good and then he can just ask himself if a Lawful Good character would do something whenever he's not sure if he's in character.

He has a bit of a history with our games. He tends to mostly have characters that act as a "pile of mechanics" to use a phrase that has been used towards his Character before. He has played about as much, if not more, than both of the other two, but is always looking at the mechanical side of the characters. I only bring this up because he has actually asked me for advice on how to do these things, which I am hardly in a place to give, novice as I am in my own right.

 

[Lanliss]

This may sound strange, but maybe he needs some tactical options. Maybe dig into how to support more tactical play without bogging the game down, and he will engage more. I've seen with with at least two players, who wanted to play analytical, tactical characters. 4e was a boon for them, because they could dig into their character's tactical options without having to stop and ask questions OOC. they literally became highly engaged roleplayers over the course of the middle heroic teir, because the game supported the kind of character they wanted to play.

5e can do that as well, but it's less strongly supported.

The point is, perhaps what is needed is to find options that let the character tactically analyze without spending turn time asking OOC tactical questions.

I gave one of the character the martial arts die from the monk, I wonder if I could do something similar here. Maybe a kind of Battle master maneuver system for Tactical Wizards? Or heck, maybe even a whole Tactical Wizard subclass, if I feel like going that far.

 

[Lanliss]

I don't so much encourage players to think form the POV of their characters, but rather try to get them to keep things in terms of the fictional acts that the character is doing in the context of the scene I'm describing. Describing what the players want the characters to do rather than asking questions of the DM is one way to do that, but doesn't necessarily put the player into the mind of the character. I also put Inspiration in the hands of the players by having them say when they've acted in accordance with their personal characteristics which at least encourages them to do stuff the character might do in order to get a mechanical benefit. Sometimes I ask questions about how a character feels about this or that, especially as it relates to character ties or connections that are established before play.

Otherwise, I don't think I do a whole lot to get players to identify with the emotions of their characters. I feel that's really only something a player can do on his or her own. My experience is that players by and large do a really good job of roleplaying in my games, even pickup players that aren't well-screened. So maybe I have more influence than I think - I don't know.

Speaking from experience with your games, I think a couple of the biggest things are the character ties, which give an easy connection to reference when interacting with your party members, and the phrasing you request, which makes it much easier, IMO, to remain in character.

I plan to implement the second one in our next session, since you spoiled me. It actually bothered me when my players asked simple questions like "how big are these trees?". I was also going to try the character ties, but my players were not interested in it.

 

[GMMichael]

So he's kind of a cold and analytical player, and he's playing a cold and analytic character? I'm not sure what the problem is. I mean, it's kind of taking the easy way out, but it's just as valid of a way to RP than if an action-oriented player had an action-oriented character.

One suggestion that I would make is to definitely go for an alignment, though. Especially for new players, an alignment can serve as a useful tool for figuring out the character's perspective. It sounds like this character is Lawful (plan-oriented), and most parties tend toward Good (unless you're specifically playing an Evil campaign), so make the character Lawful Good and then he can just ask himself if a Lawful Good character would do something whenever he's not sure if he's in character.

Noooo! Not alignment!

Newbs rarely understand alignments. Heck, even ENworld's seasoned veterans probably can't agree on alignments. Hold my feet to this fire, but 5e's FAITH system isn't half bad for that player. Pick a flaw. Pick an ideal. Pick a trait. Play them. Maybe your DM will give you your Inspiration point back for doing so...

 

[Lanliss]

Noooo! Not alignment!

Newbs rarely understand alignments. Heck, even ENworld's seasoned veterans probably can't agree on alignments. Hold my feet to this fire, but 5e's FAITH system isn't half bad for that player. Pick a flaw. Pick an ideal. Pick a trait. Play them. Maybe your DM will give you your Inspiration point back for doing so...

While I am nearly positive he has a bond, ideal, etc., I cannot remember what they are right now. I will get them up as soon as I get around to seeing his Character sheet again.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Newbs rarely understand alignments. Heck, even ENworld's seasoned veterans probably can't agree on alignments.

Alignments are one of those things that only fall apart if you pick at them, like Hit Points and centipedes. From a novice perspective, they work pretty well.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Try to give that player time. And maybe something his character may be especially interested in.
But don't be worried. Some players are perfectly content being quiet and taking part. And it ia not that bad for a genasi wizard to just be in the background for a while.