PC refusing to play a higher level character to start...

[starkad]

I have a PC that utterly refuses to play anything other than a character from scratch.

Here's an example... I'm currently running a game that has lasted almsot 2 years.. Characters are 15th level currently, almost 16th(quick levels, but on purpose, we wanted to get up in leevls to sample the epic level rules, and see what high level PCs can really do). When I started the game, I did so at 3rd level. I almost always start at level 1, but I wanted to kickstart it.

I had one PC that refused to play anything other than first level. I warned him his character might die easily...And repeatedly. So he picked a powerful race from the FRCS book, a Svirfneblin.

So now we're 15th level, and he is 12th (8th cleric, 4th Summoner). I am in fear of slaying his character.. He's the one that constantly has to have drama at the table, creating a ruckus about the most trivial of things. He's also stated several times that if I kill his character permanently (which is possible), that he would leave the group.

Now I know some of you are inclined to say "So let him leave, he's obviously not worth it!"... But I need people in my RPG group. We're currently at 5 people, including the DM (me).

What I am looking for is suggestions or arguements to this person who refuses to play anything but level 1 characters, to change his mind. If he brought in a level 1 character into a level 15 game, he would be killed the first session with ease. Nor would he be any use to the party, he couldn't hit anything, nor affect them.

Haaaaaaaaaaaalp!

 

[Bagpuss]

Hold on a second, I don't see your problem as he isn't going to need to play a first level character again anyway. He's already stated that if his character dies a permenant death he'll leave the group.

 

[Bonedagger]

Just try and let him play a 1st level character.

If you then think, after having tried that, that the rest of the group would be better of without him get rid of him.

It could also be that he doesn't think it's that much fun being 1st level after all. Maybe he'll leave. Maybe he'll stay. Just don't give him any special threatment. At least not until you have made sure that your other players wouldn't get pissed.

 

[starkad]

Hold on a second, I don't see your problem as he isn't going to need to play a first level character again anyway. He's already stated that if his character dies a permenant death he'll leave the group.

lmao

Just try and let him play a 1st level character.

I thought of that.. But is it really fair to the rest of the group? Trying to find a happy medium... And maybe the answer is to just let this guy go. He refuses to play anything other than D&D. And we're gearing up to play spycraft once my game is complete.

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

Let him enter with a 1st level character.

Heck, Frodo couldn't have been more than level 3. Maybe your other PCs will take it as a challenge and attempt to protect the clueless.

And if he dies, so what? That's not your problem. You cannot step on eggshells for this person to the detriment of the game. You don't need players who are immature and unable to understand that RPing is a group activity.

I'd rather DM for three good players, than three good players and one bad player.


Just IMHO...

 

[ConcreteBuddha]

But is it really fair to the rest of the group?

How is letting a player play a 1st level character unfair to the rest of the group? Why would this be an issue with them?

 

[starkad]

How is letting a player play a 1st level character unfair to the rest of the group? Why would this be an issue with them?

For the simple reason you listed above... They would feel inclined to protect him, and pamper him.. Which is what I am doing in a way I suppose. I will note I have killed him twice so far. I hedged on killing him once because I was in a bad mood and didn't want to listen to him whine.

I destroyed all his magic items at one point too... Including his near-artifact spear... That's what he gets for attacking a fiery hot remorhaz and rolling a one on the items save.

 

[Squire James]

Let's see... you basically have a player who (1) goes out of his way to be disruptive to the group, and (2) plays a wizard who basically never wants to be targeted in combat (a dream PC if I've ever heard one!).

Call his bluff. The next time he plays drama queen in combat, the bad guys (not you, play it fair) geek him! If he quits, that's his personality problem, not yours! If he whines but does not quit, well, you can probably get him to agree to the high-level replacement character too. He'll whine some more, but you've dealt with it so far, haven't you?

If all else fails, a group with 3 players is sufficient for a good game. My best game ever was with 2 players (a thief and an illusionist in a 1e game intended for a group of 6 with 3-4 fighters!).

 

[Voneth]

"If you kill me, I'll leave the group! I swear!"

That is emotional blackmail, not a behavior I am inclined to tolerate. The funny thing is that if you guys are the only gamers in town, then who is he going to game with if he leaves? Sounds like he'll be in a worse fix than you.

I used to live where there were no roleplayers myself, and after bending backwards to please the few players I could find and run games that I didn't enjoy, I almost burned out in gaming, so I took some time off. It was better to take a sabbatical than have no fun.

Recently I tried to run a game at a crowded game store (luckily I also had another game I played in off-site). I gave up simiply because I got tired of getting squeezed out to make more room for the CCG players who spent a lot more money than my rpg group. It didn't help that the group I was with was starting to act like aforementioned rpgers. So I took time off again.

Recently the CCG crowd died down and some store employees decided to run an rpg in the store again -- without asking the guy (me) who had been doing the same thing before the employees even got hired. Eventualy, I started running my game again, I lucked out and got some new players who are much better than the ones I had before.

My point is that I discovered that there are times you have to forego the whole group to ensure you keep your sanity. I think that losing one player and have only 3 players and one GM will be fine. The two year game I play in has had at least half it's session with that same number as the fourth player either can't show up or we lost someone to work schedules, etc.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

What are you trying to accomplish? The player in question is rude and abusive as shown by the threat he has made to you. He reinforces the selfish nature shown in the threat by making problems out of everything so that he can be at the center of attention.

You want my advice? Talk to the other players when he is not around. Let them know if they do not already know that he has basically threatened to walk if his character dies and listen to what they have to say. If he is this much of a problem to you then the rest of the players are probably sick of his antics and will say that you should pull no punches and if he dies he dies and if he leaves he leaves.

Odds are the 4 of you will be a smoother group without him than with him. Also without him as a dispruptive element you have a better chance of finding new players. I know if I joined a group and found one player like that I would not come back after the first session. I would quickly assume that as new guy I have to adapt to the existing group and who wants to adapt to a group being controlled by an ass.