PCs who protect their own skins. Help!!

[mmu1]

Reading through this, it really doesn't sound like some of your players actually are "good people"... Sounds like they're letting her character get pounded into dust time after time without trying to do a damn thing about it - and if other encounters are like the one you describe, they seem to be doing it to make sure they don't absorb too much damage themselves...

I think you and at least the player running the fighter need to have a talk about what it means to play well with others...

 

[Elf Witch]

Well, I'd say looking out for number one isn't neccessarily a bad thing. In fact, it's more "realistic" than most adventuring parties, willing to sacrfice their lives for each other at the drop of a hat. I would say you are simply seeing practical or pragmatic characters in action. Doc is right, the players should be helping the newbie out and learn the system, but I can't really say I would fault any of the actions the characters have taken thus far.

I have to disagree there is nothing pratical about only looking out for yourself. Do it enough and when you get into trouble no one will come to your aid. A untied party who looks after each other is a lot stronger than one where everyone just looks out for himself. You have a much better chance of coming out alive if you work together as a team and you can't do that if you are only concerned with yourself.

 

[Apok]

From a general point of view, I think you need to talk to the group about teamwork and defnitely do a little one-on-one with your newbie player about good tactics. Not that there's anything wrong with what she is doing since it gives her character great personality, but it may come to pass that she'll end up doing somthing that's going to turn out fatal because she just doesn't know any better. Alot of posters have already given out some good advice on how to handle that particular situation. How good is her grasp of the overall mechanics? If they are shaky, that's a good starting point to work on.

From a roleplaying point of view, I love this stuff! These are the bones of contention that make for interesting intra-party roleplaying. What are the alignments of all your characters, btw?

 

[Belen]

Her grasp of the mechanics are fairly good. It's just that she has never fought certain things before, so she has never used certain tactics before. I have spoken with her and I spend a good amount of time working with her out of game.

I have even spoken to the party on teamwork that day and they agreed that the monk would be the bard's bodyguard, but the second combat started, she was left out on her own again. Heck, the monk could have picked her up and still moved!

The alignments are:

Fighter- Chaotic Good
Monk- Lawful Neutral
Wizard- Chaotic Neutral
Bard (our lady newbie)- Neutral Good

 

[Apok]

I have to disagree there is nothing pratical about only looking out for yourself. Do it enough and when you get into trouble no one will come to your aid. A untied party who looks after each other is a lot stronger than one where everyone just looks out for himself. You have a much better chance of coming out alive if you work together as a team and you can't do that if you are only concerned with yourself.

It is realistic, however. Yes, in the long run good teamwork is what gets you through the tough spots, but saving one's own skin is the best short-term solution, especially at lower levels. As to weather long-term or short-term gains should be your goal, that's a whole other debate that I won't get into.

Now, you could argue that good aligned characters wouldn't leave their comerade high & dry against the wrath of a dragon but we don't know what the respective alignments and personalities of the characters are.

Call me a cynic, but I think the attitudes of the players at the time was something like, "I'll be damned if I'm going to risk my character to cover a newbie's mistake. Let her feel the fire and learn the hard way." Sad but sometimes very true. Yes, it can be frustrating being an experienced player with a newbie in the group, but that's why we have things like Patience, Understanding, and Tolerance. I prefer to think of it as having a chance to teach and pass on valuable experience to someone who is eager to learn. It is immensely satisfying to see someone who has never played the game before come to the game one day and, thanks to your tutelage and patience, become a great roleplayer.

Okay, now I feel the urge to recruit a newbie into my game...

 

[Walter_J]

My advice is the same I give all GM's who are concerned about how the players are handling their characters--DON'T BE. The GM has to run the rest of the world, and that's work enough. Let the players play their characters. The only time a GM should be concerned about what a player has his or her character do is when alignment becomes an issue, and that may be something you want to consider in the situation you described. Otherwise, if acting selfish, self serving, or simply doing whatever it takes to stay alive is within character concept/behavior/alignment, etc... then what is wrong with that?

Helping and giving advice to a new player is great. Describing the scene, handling rule questions and answering questions to the limit of a character's ability to obtain the info is a must. Making suggestions is fine. Begging a player to have his or her character take a particular action? You might want to consider checking that behavior before the players start leaning on you too much or start taking advantage of you.

Hi all,

I thought I would jump into the mix with a fairly big question. I am been a GM for nearly 8 years. I have had several very different parties under me, but never one that can be so frustrating as my current crew.

I have three very experienced player and one newbie female player. First, I have to pull their teeth to get them to help her with tactics. (I recuse myself because I am the GM and do not want to inadvertently give anything away.) Second, they always leave her in situations where she will get killed or seriously harmed.

Last weekend, they fought a dragon. She won initiative and went first taking a full round action. Then the dragon used its breath weapon. The rest of the party moved as far away as they could on their turn, leaving her alone under a hovering dragon that she had hurt on her round.

As no other targets were there, the dragon wailed on her, dropping her to -9. The others in the party were a fighter, monk and wizard. She is a Cooke bard. The fighter and monk immediately attacked the dragon first rather than move to stabilize her. I had to beg the wizard to run forward with a potion and the only thing that caused him to do it was to inform him that she was at -9!!! Note: She is the extent of their healing in the party.

What can I do to promote some teamwork in this party!? She tends to be pretty selfless and brave such as running through threatened squares to get to a fallen comrade despite the AoO. They usually do not return the favor until they are informed that she is about to die.

They guys are good people and they really know their stuff, but the "teamwork" that has occurred under other parties that I have GMed in the past seems nonexistent.

Any advice would be great!

Dave

 

[Apok]

I have even spoken to the party on teamwork that day and they agreed that the monk would be the bard's bodyguard, but the second combat started, she was left out on her own again. Heck, the monk could have picked her up and still moved!

Ah, yes. I often refer to this as the "I Gotta Get Mine!" syndrome of gaming. It comes in may flavors, but in this case it's combat. Basically, whenever combat occurs, players who have this syndrome feel that they must in some way participate in the combat and get in an equal share of the butt-kicking. Not just buffing or healing their comerades, but actually dealing physical damage or imparing the enemy in some way. The Monk in question probably got caught up in the "I Gotta Get Mine" aspect that he took off to join the frey, leaving the Bard alone. My only solution is to make it "worth their while" to stand back and make like Kevin Costner. Have some monsters sneak up and threaten the Bard, giving the bodyguard some actual work to do. Nothing is more boring than guarding a character you know isn't going to get attacked unless you leave their side. Make his position feel warranted and not just "guard the newb" duty.

 

[Storm Raven]

The dragon was hovering above all of them. She never charged forward. She just used a full attack on the dragon and could not move away. Instead of staying at her side, they used their actions to run away, leaving her alone under the dragon.

It did take an attack of opportunity on at least one fo the fleeing characters didn't it? Preferably the unarmored wizard.

 

[Storminator]

I know this is borderline blasphemy, but you could also do what I do with the roleplaying-expert, tactics-challenged player IMC: I explicitly cut her breaks that I don't cut the other players.

<SNIPPING supporting material>

I think this is the way to go. I do it all the time. I play with my son and his friends, so I really have to mold a bunch of teenagers into gamers, and I do it by discouraging behaviour I don't like.

Specifically, I attack the cowards first. If I'm a dragon, and a piddly little bard pokes me and the wizard runs away, I apply my enormous intellect, pick out the mage of the group and go maul him. If I can get a full round attack off I might tail slap the bard.

PS

 

[Belen]

Thanks for all the advice. The guys are really good players and I have to wonder if my style of GMing has anything to do with the trouble. It has been years since anyone has died in my game and I think I give off the impression that I will not allow any character death.

I will talk things over the one of the members of the group privately and get his take on things. He has gamed longer than any of us, so we should be able to work things out.

I just wanted to get your take on things because I needed to know if I was misinterpreting the situation or if I had a real problem. I think it may be a little of both.