How would you handle this player/situation? (long-ish)

[Elf Witch]

I have to say I was rather taken back at some of the things said in this thread. You said this guy is a novice. Then you all need to give him a break instead of calling him a stupid player.

I remember when I started playing it was sometimes hard to get a grasp on everything. I was lucky that I had a good DM and the rest of the players were experienced and really helped me.

As the DM a lot of this is your doing. First why start newbies so high the higher level the more there is to deal with start lower so they can learn the mechanics and how their classes work. Secondly you allowed him to play the template and the class. I have found that with newbies it's better to stick to core until they get the hang of the game.

As for the Bushido this sounds like so many paladin arguments sit it down with him and write out the code so it is in black and white.

I too think its great that he likes his character even though he is not as effecient as the rest of the party.

I think this is a DM problem not a player problem and if you don't handle this well then the guy may just quit DnD and say hey computers are so much more fun.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

You might point him towards a Sor 1/Ftr x/Dragon Disciple. A few true strikes a day+power attack=major hurtin', and it wouldn't hurt to work up to his draconic ideal.

 

[boxstop7]

Just a quick reply, as I'm off to work...

The player and I have discussed his bushido at length. Recall the "Klingon" comment he made; this is what he envisioned for his character, and he is not playing it. That's the issue. We've established that his character is not necessarily a leader in the group, but will follow the orders of someone who has proven him/herself as wiser and more worthy of leadership. We've worked extensively on the character background (which is still flimsy IMO, but I'm willing to be flexible here as he is relatively new). He's on loan from his Lord to search for an item that would be particularly beneficial to his Lord.

He said last night that he likes the Samurai class, but doesn't like the bushido. He's basically playing his character as he, the player, would react to things. This is very, very common for new players, and I understand that. I don't know a single person who didn't fall into this pattern when they first started D&D, myself included. He said some things last night. "The whole 'fear no death' thing is a problem. I don't like the idea of a character sticking around just for honor." and "I love the abilities but not the code. Though I tend to agree with the code in principle, it's the tactics I have a problem with." I take that last statement to be pure powergame; i.e., I want all the perks but I don't want to give anything up for them. So I told him that, if that's the case, maybe a Samurai isn't the right class for him b/c I'm not in the habit of giving things away for free. I like balance in my games, and right now I see his character is weaker compared to the others. The reasons for this may be many. But the situation exists, and I'm trying to correct it.

He's also an extensive CRPG gamer (I love the kid to death, but think stereotypical 'geek' for these purposes), and has asked me repeatedly why I don't play games like Morrowind and Everqeust. I simply don't; they bore me. I'd much rather sit around a table with friends and play the character. I like the social and acting aspects of D&D. I like creating characters with nuances and, yes, weaknesses. But that's just me. He doesn't like that at all, b/c (warning: blanket statement) CRPGs do little but teach powergaming. He's so used to being god-like in computer games that I suspect it's a struggle and a bore for him to play a "human" character.

He's certainly not a "stupid player", and he is a good friend of mine; I've known the kid since we were about 7 years old. And I have already accepted and stated that much of this problem is my fault to begin with. All the other players wanted to play higher levels, and they all have more experience with D&D than this guy. Rather than start everyone at low levels, I decided to compromise and start at low-mid levels. We've been going through practice sessions before we start the campaign for the express purpose of helping the less experienced people learn the game of D&D. I'm less interested in a discussion of what should have been done, and more interested in what can now be done. I don't mean to sound like I'm griping, as some good disussion has been generated and that's exactly what I'm looking for. But I'm looking ahead to the future instead of dwelling on what I could have done differently. Keep 'em coming...I really appreciate it...

Thanks,

- Jason

 

[Three_Haligonians]

My suggestion would be, if he is a Dragon freak, give him the Draconic Template, as it's only a +1.

You might point him towards a Sor 1/Ftr x/Dragon Disciple. A few true strikes a day+power attack=major hurtin'

I think Patman and John have offered some great advice here. I was once in a similar situation to your player. Not really understanding what the drawbacks of playing a character with a high level adjustment were, I created a satyr character. Now, satyrs have a +7 level adjustment and I found, when paired up with the other 14th level characters that my hitpoints were so crappy that I didn't stand a chance. I really wanted to play a satyr, so my gm and I sat down and reduced the ECL on the satyr from the monster manual by droping the racial hit dice, skills and saves. Therefore, my satyr was only a level adjustment of +2. After that, she could really hold her own in combat.

Your player wants to be a tank. Let him know that by playing a half-dragon, he's really holding himself back in that area by losing out on hit points (this is probably why he's such a 'fraidy cat in battle). But there are loads of ways of being dragon-like WITHOUT using the half-dragon template. Check the two examples out that Patman and John have suggested, and, if you've got the miniture's handbook, check out dragon samuri, too, sounds right up his alley.

He said last night that he likes the Samurai class, but doesn't like the bushido. He's basically playing his character as he, the player, would react to things. This is very, very common for new players, and I understand that. I don't know a single person who didn't fall into this pattern when they first started D&D, myself included. He said some things last night. "The whole 'fear no death' thing is a problem. I don't like the idea of a character sticking around just for honor." and "I love the abilities but not the code. Though I tend to agree with the code in principle, it's the tactics I have a problem with." I take that last statement to be pure powergame; i.e., I want all the perks but I don't want to give anything up for them. So I told him that, if that's the case, maybe a Samurai isn't the right class for him b/c I'm not in the habit of giving things away for free. I like balance in my games, and right now I see his character is weaker compared to the others. The reasons for this may be many. But the situation exists, and I'm trying to correct it.

Right, he's obviously not understanding that you've got to give and take in classes. Let him know that the code is intrinsically part of playing a samuri, just like paladin characters have to put up with that lawful good clause and wizards have to put up with crappy hit points, and rogues have to put up with...hey! what DO rogues have to put up with??? Seriously, the code is part and parcel with the samuri, if he doesn't like it (just like if you had someone who wanted to play a chaotic character and was picking paladin as her class) he should really consider some other classes. Sit down with him and go over the benefits of other classes.

And just to play his side a bit, judging from your original post sounds like you were manhandling him a bit in combat. He's new, he's trying to figure it all out, let him play a game without getting beat to death for a change and he might gain some confidence in battle. Even if you have to cheat to do it, ease up on him a bit and hopefully you'll see a change!

Hope this helps!

T from Three Haligonians

 

[WayneLigon]

My suggestions:

1. If only one person in your group knows much about D&D, then keep the class and race selections down to those in the player's handbook.
2. Start at first level and work up from there.
3. Be very cautious about letting the non-familiar people play pure spellcasters; it's a lot of work and generally require a person to be very organized.

 

[Palantir]

I'm playing the wizard in this group

Thought I would hop in and offer my observations. The past two sessions have been combat-intensive, to say the least. Probably seven combats ranging from unclassed orcs to a black dragon to the Goblin Clerics from Hell (GCfH).

The combats have been enjoyable, from my perspective, with everyone participating in the combats and having a grand ol' time. Everyone, except for the poor guy playing the half-dragon samurai.

I know the discussion thus far has mostly centered around how the crunchy bits can be changed, but what I saw was a fella who, in the combat with the CGfH, saw about two rounds of action in an engagement that took two hours of real-time. That is a long, long time to have your front-liner standing back behind the mage, because of cumulative damage and spell effects. A long time to sit back and watch everyone else laugh and curse the dice and have fun. The player might be keen on the character, but it won't take too many sessions like that before he's not-so-keen on tabletop gaming in general.

So what will increase his enjoyment of the game, as well as allow him to contribute more to the collective enjoyment? As Tom Wolfe said in The Right Stuff, "I've tried A! I've tried B! I've tried C..." Our DM let him create the PC he wanted to play. The PC, for whatever reason, is not effective in his role as a front-liner. So the DM tried chatting with the player to see if he wanted to switch to another PC. Player says not, so I'm of the opinion now that we let it ride and collectively take our chances.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I feel bad for the player. He has a strong concept in mind that sounds pretty interesting (a samurai pulling from some ancient heritage of dragons) but it just doesn't fit into D&D. I think a lot of you are forgetting just how much you know about the crunchy bits of D&D and how much of a disadvantage it can be starting out when your head's not yet wrapped around how a D&D world operates.

I think that it's really worth pushing what S'mon and some others said -- let the guy have the "Samurai with draconic heritage" fluff along with some sort of straight-up character build (human fighter, for instance).

I really do think that there's a fundamental disconnect between what the player wants the character to do, and what the character can actually do. I'd try again to see if you can get him to understand that.

 

[Tuzenbach]

OK. Immediately, the player "knew" he wanted the "tank" role. However, during character creation, it becomes apparent that the half-dragon samurai only has more hit points than the party's wizard and more than 20 fewer than the party's usual "tank".

As DM, you're almost obligated to find a way of increasing that character's hit points. Whether it be an increase in levels from 5th to 6th, a "newbie" bonus of a dozen (bringing his total to a respectable 58), or what have you.

You KNEW his desire was to "tank", yet you let him attempt to "tank" with too few hit points. Why? It's a bit like that Monty Python "Cheese Shop" sketch, isn't it?

 

[Arnwyn]

The player and I have discussed his bushido at length. Recall the "Klingon" comment he made; this is what he envisioned for his character, and he is not playing it. That's the issue.

Not enough. You've only "discussed" bushido, and then you wonder why you're having issues? *sheesh*

What you need to do is fully record, in writing, the entire code of bushido that you, as DM, envision for your campaign. Then you need to supply a copy of that to the player (as well as one for yourself). That is how you avoid arguments about bushido and expected actions.

If the player doesn't like the code (as you alluded to in your post), then you tell him, in no uncertain terms, that because he does not agree with bushido, he obviously cannot play a samurai character.

Other than that, if he's enjoying the other aspects of his character, such as the half-dragon aspect (even if he's getting wiped out alot), then let him play it (with maybe modifications to his class). If he's having fun, then all's good.

 

[maddman75]

So he isn't interested in making a different character. Well, for starters here's a decent description of Bushido, as well as the religious and philo

http://mcel.pacificu.edu/as/students/bushido/bindex.html

As stated, Samurai believe in reincarnation, and have no fear of death or danger.

There's also the problem that he wants to be a front line tank. Did you have him roll for ability scores? Did he roll badly, or put a low score on his CON? In any case he *will* be behind on hit points. That is the problem with ECL races, they tend to be eggshells with hammers.