Some players shouldn't play certain PC types

[Roger]

There's this game I play in where a player, let's call them "X" has a mostly bard character. The problem is that X is a very slow thinker.

Wolfwood2, what steps have you taken to attempt to remedy this situation? Have you spoken to the DM about it? Have you spoken to Player X?



Cheers,
Roger

 

[BadMojo]

Is X actually enjoying playing these "social" characters? If it were me, I wouldn't enjoy playing a character where I'm constantly in situations that make me feel, for lack of a better word, incompetent.

I certainly wouldn't force him to change characters, so I suppose if he's really set on playing the Face Man you'll all just have to suffer through it or risk alienating him.

 

[Brazeku]

You know what, something just occurred to me. My other suggestion is okay, but it is an imperfect fix. I have an alternate idea that might suit the character and the player better.

His high charisma and diplomacy may not have anything to do with what he says at all. It could represent an air of approachability or a kind of strange appeal that the character has.

What this means is that the burden of NPC encounter interactions could fall on the NPCs- for whatever reason, they are drawn to the character, confiding in him and offering information unasked for, simply because of a type of magnetism he has. Plus it's kinda neat to have a character who is clumsy with words, but whom everyone likes and tries to help out because he has passive appeal!

 

[Mouseferatu]

I certainly wouldn't force him to change characters, so I suppose if he's really set on playing the Face Man you'll all just have to suffer through it or risk alienating him.

So it's better for 4 people out of 5 to be miserable, if it avoids making the 1 person out of 5 miserable?

I don't follow that logic.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Seconded

I won't play with anyone that can't do a good job of talking in character.

Neither will I.

-Samir

 

[dagger]

Neither will I.

-Samir

What if they play a mute barbarian?

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Touché

What if they play a mute barbarian?

The character type makes little difference. I don't game with inarticulate players.

-Samir

 

[Quartz]

Someone socially incompetent might want to play a rogue/bard precisely because s/he is socially incompetent/awkward in real life? Is that bad? It sure isn't, since that's part of the realm of fantasies an RPG can fulfill during a game session. The question becomes: how do you make a socially incompetent person feel like she's in control of the action of his/her bard and succeeds at social encounters? Same thing about frail, passive people in RL wanting to play fighters or barbarians.

Are there ways in which the DM can empower these people to make them feel like their decisions have an impact on the game and fulfills their fantasies?

A most astute post.

 

[BadMojo]

So it's better for 4 people out of 5 to be miserable, if it avoids making the 1 person out of 5 miserable?

I don't follow that logic.

Actually, I didn't really intend to make a judgment either way. It all depends on how miserable the others really are and whether or not stopping this guy from playing the character he wants is going to end up ruining a friendship.

It's a tough situation. The best scenario would be that Player X is more happy playing a different type of character anyway. The point I was trying to make was that if X truly likes playing his character and is told he's not allowed to do so anymore, it could end up getting ugly.

I'm honestly not sure what I'd do in that situation.

 

[SiderisAnon]

If you're having problems with him being slow, you can have him make the diplomacy roll FIRST, and then use the result as guidelines for what he said (okay, you got an 18, that's good, here are some ideas for things that you can say). Then give him some choices and let him fill in the blanks with actual roleplaying.

I was thinking something along the same lines. If you've ever played Neverwinter Nights or one of the similar games, when you get to NPC interactions, you get a choice of several options and you can pick which one you want to use. (i.e. "Do you 1. Bribe the guard; 2. Try to fast talk your way past the guard; 3. Try to intimidate the guard; 4. Walk away.")

This may help Player X because it will start establishing an idea of what he CAN do when he talks to NPCs. Then over time, he would hopefully start providing more intro information, like saying, "I want to convince the guard to let us go past with a bribe," before the roll is ever made.

Thinking more on it, there is a possible problem with this solution. If the problem is not that the player doesn't have any ideas but that the player is having a hard time choosing between the options they do have, then this sort of solution won't help Player X. This could be a confidence issue (too uncertain to make a decision from the options) or an articulation problem (unable to form an option into coherent thought/speech).

I agree with the idea of talking to the player outside of the game, and perhaps to the DM as well. It is important that one player not ruin the game for the other players. Now maybe the person has a problem that needs to be given some slack, but then maybe the player needs to play a character who is sometimes socializing rather than being the group's main face man. (For instance, the rogue who goes to the back streets to look for information, which is mostly done through Gather Information, but doesn't represent the party generally.)


As a follow up: Can this Player X respond to questions like, "What are you trying to accomplish?" when Player X is roleplaying? Maybe what the player needs is some further help even before the roll. If Player X can say, "I want to get into the castle," then the DM can ask the, "Do you want to bribe/bluff/whatever?" question.