I would very much be interested in seeing this developed into the newest child pop-psychology website. We could link it to my own planned site for building moral character in adolescents: cryingandmowingthelawn dot com.
Player challenging DM authority and competative
- Thread starter Arbanax
- Start date
I would very much be interested in seeing this developed into the newest child pop-psychology website. We could link it to my own planned site for building moral character in adolescents: cryingandmowingthelawn dot com.
Arbanax
First Post
Ok worked through most people's comments up to page 3 and for brevity's sake just mention names rather than quote in detail.
Quote 6 gourdcaptain
I'm sorry I have to ask - but how exactly did he min-max a rogue assassin hybrid? I really don't see much synergy there.
Emm well maybe not on the true scal of optimisation but amongst the existing players perhaps more so. I don't know squat about optimizing characters and I thought his Warlock was pretty good. In fact I think all my players seem to get through encounters with little difficulty at present! I'm having trouble challenging them with monster appropriate to their level. At first and second they seemed far more challenged than now at 3rd. And this Rogue Assassin with a Challenge Seeking +1 Rapier seems pretty good to me. But as I say, I do feel a little out of my depth when it comes to these things. I'm still on a steep learning curve.
Felon Let's start with the part where I think you're wrong: don't try to enforce party diversity. Encourage? Yes. Enforce? No.
I agree, though I may have appeared to be saying otherwise, despite what is openly expressed here, I've largely kept my opinions within the group to myself, but have made suggestions in the interests of the party, nothing more.
fanboy2000 Thanks for the suggestions I'm making a list ;-)
Riastlin: Thanks for the comments, I guess I didn't want to encourage the players to start swapping out characters every time they didn't get their desired result. But having said that I'd never stop someone from changing a character if they were very unhappy. But I do understand that this guy has a tendency to swap characters when they stop being top performers (at least as compared to the rest of the team).
Nemesis Destiny Sounds like this guy has a major case of "I must WIN at D&D" for which there is no known cure, except getting over it.
His best friend suggested that this was the case - it appears that increasingly he treats the game as competition between players rather than cooperation - which is why I was initially reluctant to let him play this assassin rogue. Thanks for the tips re optimisation.
MrMyth You hit it on the head, with most of the character being PHB 1, apart from a monk, I think this Rogue Assassin - did I mention they are Eladrin, are trying to be able to be ultra mobile, damage dealing quickstep. Compared to the rest of the group (no one else is a min maxer - but when they do want to swap things around I'm pretty lenient on these things) I think he will try to outshine them.
Goonalan Thanks for the comments.
BobTheNob You make some excellent points about him as a person, regardless of his character and for me (let alone everyone else) its clear its his motivation and behaviour that has been the real issue for us all. I certainly will make this point as whatever happens next, I think you're right that the health of the group is paramount. After all this is supposed to be fun, but his behaviour has just about ticked everyone off.
shidaku Thanks for the helpful caveat here. I certainly wouldn't treat him in the manner he has treated me. People may act childish, but there is no need to validate it by treating them like children.
Ryujin & MrMyth
Thank you I didn't know this and maybe since he has built this on Character builder he doesn't either.
Mummolus, vagabundo, Incendax Thanks for the comments, again duly noted.
I think when it comes down to it most of you seem in favour of at least trying to redefine the boundaries I'd tried to set when we began - which no one else has ever tried to cross or felt were unreasonable apart from this player.
I'll also talk things over with the Rogue see what he feels.
And when alls said and done if talking doesn't work, for the good of the group, if he needs to go, he needs to go. I appreciate as DM I only have any authority by consent (hence the reason I often consult the party on house rules etc) but there comes a point where for the good of the party someone needs to draw a line and enforce it otherwise things fall apart!
In any case I hold my hand up and admit I've probably been guilty of making more than a few mistakes, but I would also say that the difference between the two of us, is this guy (I've subsequently found out) has a bit of a reputation for falling out with groups/people (something I didn't know before hand)! I'm not on any power trip and only DM because of the majority consent.
Anyway thanks everyone its been great to have the support and encouragement of the group.
Ab
Quote 6 gourdcaptain
I'm sorry I have to ask - but how exactly did he min-max a rogue assassin hybrid? I really don't see much synergy there.
Emm well maybe not on the true scal of optimisation but amongst the existing players perhaps more so. I don't know squat about optimizing characters and I thought his Warlock was pretty good. In fact I think all my players seem to get through encounters with little difficulty at present! I'm having trouble challenging them with monster appropriate to their level. At first and second they seemed far more challenged than now at 3rd. And this Rogue Assassin with a Challenge Seeking +1 Rapier seems pretty good to me. But as I say, I do feel a little out of my depth when it comes to these things. I'm still on a steep learning curve.
Felon Let's start with the part where I think you're wrong: don't try to enforce party diversity. Encourage? Yes. Enforce? No.
I agree, though I may have appeared to be saying otherwise, despite what is openly expressed here, I've largely kept my opinions within the group to myself, but have made suggestions in the interests of the party, nothing more.
fanboy2000 Thanks for the suggestions I'm making a list ;-)
Riastlin: Thanks for the comments, I guess I didn't want to encourage the players to start swapping out characters every time they didn't get their desired result. But having said that I'd never stop someone from changing a character if they were very unhappy. But I do understand that this guy has a tendency to swap characters when they stop being top performers (at least as compared to the rest of the team).
Nemesis Destiny Sounds like this guy has a major case of "I must WIN at D&D" for which there is no known cure, except getting over it.
His best friend suggested that this was the case - it appears that increasingly he treats the game as competition between players rather than cooperation - which is why I was initially reluctant to let him play this assassin rogue. Thanks for the tips re optimisation.
MrMyth You hit it on the head, with most of the character being PHB 1, apart from a monk, I think this Rogue Assassin - did I mention they are Eladrin, are trying to be able to be ultra mobile, damage dealing quickstep. Compared to the rest of the group (no one else is a min maxer - but when they do want to swap things around I'm pretty lenient on these things) I think he will try to outshine them.
Goonalan Thanks for the comments.
BobTheNob You make some excellent points about him as a person, regardless of his character and for me (let alone everyone else) its clear its his motivation and behaviour that has been the real issue for us all. I certainly will make this point as whatever happens next, I think you're right that the health of the group is paramount. After all this is supposed to be fun, but his behaviour has just about ticked everyone off.
shidaku Thanks for the helpful caveat here. I certainly wouldn't treat him in the manner he has treated me. People may act childish, but there is no need to validate it by treating them like children.
Ryujin & MrMyth
Thank you I didn't know this and maybe since he has built this on Character builder he doesn't either.
Mummolus, vagabundo, Incendax Thanks for the comments, again duly noted.
I think when it comes down to it most of you seem in favour of at least trying to redefine the boundaries I'd tried to set when we began - which no one else has ever tried to cross or felt were unreasonable apart from this player.
I'll also talk things over with the Rogue see what he feels.
And when alls said and done if talking doesn't work, for the good of the group, if he needs to go, he needs to go. I appreciate as DM I only have any authority by consent (hence the reason I often consult the party on house rules etc) but there comes a point where for the good of the party someone needs to draw a line and enforce it otherwise things fall apart!
In any case I hold my hand up and admit I've probably been guilty of making more than a few mistakes, but I would also say that the difference between the two of us, is this guy (I've subsequently found out) has a bit of a reputation for falling out with groups/people (something I didn't know before hand)! I'm not on any power trip and only DM because of the majority consent.
Anyway thanks everyone its been great to have the support and encouragement of the group.
Ab
That's a distinct possibility when you force a player to use a character that they don't like.
Your approach that you've described here is incredibly heavy-handed, and is not likely to produce the result that you want it to - regardless of whether or not the player is an immature jerk. I would recommend trying to tailor encounters to the actual group composition (and skill level) rather than trying to force them into some "ideal" shape. And to work with the players in creating characters that they're happy with. But don't be afraid to ditch the disruptive player(s) or walk away / step down as DM when you can't do that.
Raven Crowking
First Post
It is not "incredibly heavy-handed" to expect that a player retain a character of his own creation at least until it makes sense to shift that character out. Indeed, it is disruptive to do anything else.
RC
RC
Last edited:
See, this is a mindset I understand, but have trouble with when taken to such extremes. The player is not enjoying playing his character. Is him not enjoying the game really less important an issue than avoiding 'disruption'?
I mean, I can see scenarios where that is the case: In the middle of a fight, for example, or in the midst of some big roleplaying scene or whatever. And I know that some campaigns you don't really want to have people just swapping characters willy-nilly.
But the player really should have an opportunity to change characters if they want to. Now, that doesn't mean that gives them a right to bypass limits on character options as set by the DM! But if someone really wants to switch... figuring out a way for their current character to exit the party, letting them build a new one and then finding a good way to bring that character in... those are marks, in my mind, of a good DM.
Otherwise you only encourage situations like the above - where the character suicides on the rest of the party so that it now 'makes sense' to shift their character out.
Honestly, I do feel that between sessions is the best time for this, and that is what I would encourage in this sort of scenario. I'm not saying that the entire party should have to drop what they are doing and let someone instantly shift to a new character at a moment's notice. But there is a lot of room between that and not letting someone switch to a new character at all.
But yeah - saying to someone, "No, that is who you have to play, changing characters is not an option" - that is absolutely heavy-handed, and just inviting trouble to happen.
Nemesis Destiny
Adventurer
I'd XP MrMyth, but alas, I must spread it around first.
Nullzone
Explorer
Blargh, same here.
MrMyth's post almost perfectly embodies the "yes, but..." concept that is near (if not at) the top of the DM credo. Taking options away from your players is not a good way to endear yourself to them; if a player wants to switch characters, then generally you should work with that player to ensure their character concept fits into the campaign world, and talk to them about how they might like to see the transition happen. Even if they're not happy with their current character, odds are good that they have some emotional investment in it, and giving them a good transitional method allows them to move some of that emotional investment from one character to the other, which helps keep them invested in your game, which generally makes for a better experience for everyone.
Most players will be more than happy with this outcome as it shows that the DM is listening, and with a little patience they'll get their new character, and it'll feel completely natural for everyone else instead of being a horrible wreck to suspension of disbelief that one toon polymorphs into the other and somehow the party is none the wiser.
MrMyth's post almost perfectly embodies the "yes, but..." concept that is near (if not at) the top of the DM credo. Taking options away from your players is not a good way to endear yourself to them; if a player wants to switch characters, then generally you should work with that player to ensure their character concept fits into the campaign world, and talk to them about how they might like to see the transition happen. Even if they're not happy with their current character, odds are good that they have some emotional investment in it, and giving them a good transitional method allows them to move some of that emotional investment from one character to the other, which helps keep them invested in your game, which generally makes for a better experience for everyone.
Most players will be more than happy with this outcome as it shows that the DM is listening, and with a little patience they'll get their new character, and it'll feel completely natural for everyone else instead of being a horrible wreck to suspension of disbelief that one toon polymorphs into the other and somehow the party is none the wiser.
Prestidigitalis
First Post
That's depends on the campaign.
Let's say you have a DM who is (for the sake of this hypothetical) a "good" DM, but also one who doesn't have much time for preparation. That DM might find it difficult to adjust; after all, there is both an old character exiting and a new character entering, and either one of them might have significant impact on the storyline. In that case I would suggest the player and DM confer to make adjustments to the existing character to try to make it more enjoyable. (Although that won't work so well if the problem is the established personality, back story, etc. of the character rather than the mechanical aspects.)
It's also worth pointing out that there is a big difference between the player who is always wanting to switch characters and the one who wants to do it for the first time. If it's the former, I think the DM really needs to sit down with the player and discuss motivations, preferences and understanding of the game's core paradigms. If it's the latter -- hell, just say yes, but insist on a good background -- it's the least the player can do.
I agree with this statement. Sometimes people make a character and then discover it sounded better in theory than in practice; it's just not what they want to play. That's different from someone who has character ADD (and I say this as someone who suffers from that particular affliction).
The former should be allowed, even encouraged, to either revamp the old PC or bring in a new one. For the latter, if the DM doesn't want to deal with the hassle of bringing in a new PC every few weeks, it's reasonable to say, "Dude, pick a class and stick with it." But even then I would allow at least one do-over.
