Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2884896" data-attributes="member: 7240">To echo what others have said here, this player isn't metagaming. He is gaming.The rules of the game are the physics of the universe. If the character is observant, he will optimize his effectiveness based on his knowledge of the world.I think this is the real problem here. It sounds to me like you and your other players enjoy an especially detail-oriented style of roleplay where various things like buying and selling objects are played out in careful detail. If I were in a group like this, it would drive me batty. I am all for playing out verbal interactions between PCs and NPCs -- indeed, this is the part of the game I value most -- but I want to get through the inconsequential stuff so I can get onto talking to important NPCs.I had a player like this and I found it annoying. Why wouldn't the character know how to position himself so as to get the most attacks of opportunity. If the character is intelligent and observant, he should be able to put himself in tactically optimal positions -- after all, his life is at stake. Remember: players are only their characters about 4 hours a week. The characters are themselves 168 hours a week. Chances are that anything the player comes up with, the character will have had more than enough time and incentive to figure out for himself.To continue my thought, PCs are people who fight for a living. Adventuring is their only means of financial support and, on top of that, every time they adventure they risk death. Why wouldn't they know tactics down to the minutest detail. Why wouldn't a mage learn to eyeball exactly where to drop a fireball for maximum effect?Maybe. How frustrated is he with what the other players spend time on?To be honest, I can't think of a lot of motivations that would cause people to go out and risk death week after week, unless they were planning to spend all that gold on something pretty important. As for the XP, I think the other posters have covered that well. There are lots of ways to award experience points; it sounds like you might want to tweak yours.It sounds to me like this character is a cool, long-term, strategic thinker who is able to set aside his emotions and develop clear-headed plans designed to have the maximum possible chance of success. Such people do exist in the real world. It sounds like this fellow is doing quite an adequate job of playing such an individual.Why not just figure out how many of them he could explain his character carrying and then calculate encumbrance? Crossbows are worth 35gp each new. 315gp is a lot of money -- it would pay for quite a few mercenaries to attack slavers. Why would someone leave 315gp lying on the ground just because it smelled bad? Any low level character I had wouldn't.This guy is working all the time, trying to raise enough money and get powerful enough to take on these slavers. I just don't see sewage getting in the way of a money-raising opportunity like this.I'm inclined to agree. Unless roleplaying an interaction with a parchment merchant is a whole lot of fun for the group, it seems like this could be dispensed with through a few Gather Information and Appraise checks.The interactions in the main plot. For a lot of people, enjoying an RPG is like a good movie or novel. Imagine if an hour of X-Men II had been devoted to the X-Men interacting with cashiers and waitresses.I wouldn't characterize his desire as for rapid play, more like non-glacial.Here, I'm with you. It's supposed to be about three sessions per level, I recall.Let me ask this: would your other players have less fun if NPC interaction were limited to that which is germaine to the story? Would your other players miss the interactions with the cashiers, waitresses and beggars? If not, perhaps tweaking your GMing style might lead to an overall happy group.Your version was not one-sided at all. You clearly presented the situation in a very balanced way, otherwise I would not have ended up identifying so strongly with the unhappy player.</blockquote>

Verification