The druid is not fighting!!! LONG!

[Wippit Guud]

Bull. Plain and simple, bull. It would be beating him up because he isn't helping the group as much as they want. It's not "for his own good". That has all the logic of real-life domestic abuse situations where the agressor says the same thing.

Now you're taking it out of context... if the guy is a coward, why is he with a group of people fighting stuff? Why isn't he somewhere safe? It is impossible to roleplay a coward in D&D, because a realistic coward wouldn't voluntarily be put into those situations... last I heard, he's not being forced to accompany them.

I retrat the beating-up idea, even though they way it was replied to seemed a little aggressive towards me, but I was thinking more along the lines of realism in a medieval world, not good and evil (been reading book 2 of Song of Ice and Fire, it probably adversly affected my suggestoin, it's a pretty violent book)

 

[Mark Chance]

First, guys, lay off with the ad hominems, wouldja? Sheesh.

But they're so much easier than actually having anything of substance to say.

And this can all be fun. It can be a chance for the group to see how party dynamics work.

If it's handled in a "punish the player" fashion, however, it's gonna suck for everyone. DO NOT do that.

Well said. It seems to me, based on the limited information received from the actual person in the know, that there is blame to be shared all around. As I've already pointed out:

The druid's player dropped the ball big time. Intentional or not, mistakes were made.

The psychic warrior's player also seems to have miscalculated. A noble death is all fine and good, but surely he had other options besides "stand and fight." Did the psychic warrior resort to total defense to decrease odds of getting whacked? Did he have some sort of power or item he could've manifested or used on the defensive to decrease the odds of getting whacked? Or did he just stand there toe-to-toe with a foe who apparently had him outclassed?

What was the rest of the party doing? For example, was there anything the wizard could've done to increase the psychic warrior's chances of surviving another round or two until the druid screwed up his courage and slapped a heal on the psychic warrior?

Why is this relatively high-level party dependent on a single druid for healing? No potions? No scrolls that a rogue or bard could utilize via Use Magic Device?

What about the druid's animal companions? I've seen this mentioned several times, but don't recall an answer. I've run high-level druids before. High-level druids do not melee. They send in big, buffed beasties with sharp claws and fangs to do that for them.

All of these seem like good questions. Anyone who was actually part of the game session know any of the answers?

 

[Pielorinho]

Should having 12 levels of adventuinr experience include what you would learn in 6 weeks of training?

No.

Remember that a major portion of what you learn in those six weeks of training is to follow orders. A modern combat unit isn't a democracy: it's a benevolent dictatorship. Most gaming groups I've been in are closer to democracies (or anarchy) than dictatorships.

12 levels of adventuring teaches you something very, very different. It teaches you the capabilities of your PC and, to a lesser degree, the capabilities of your party and, to a lesser degree, the capabilities of your enemies. It teaches you some of how the party can cooperate together to overcome enemies. It doesn't necessarily teach you to obey orders when they're shouted at you, especially if the importance of doing so hasn't been emphasized outside of battle.

More importantly, playing a PC through 12 levels teaches you far less than spending 6 weeks in boot camp or than actually being a PC would teach you. I'm willing to cut him a little slack because of this.

Daniel

 

[Wippit Guud]

The psychic warrior's player also seems to have miscalculated. A noble death is all fine and good, but surely he had other options besides "stand and fight." Did the psychic warrior resort to total defense to decrease odds of getting whacked? Did he have some sort of power or item he could've manifested or used on the defensive to decrease the odds of getting whacked? Or did he just stand there toe-to-toe with a foe who apparently had him outclassed?

The way I read it, he was expecing a healing spell from the druid. I would've stayed if I expected a little healing.

 

[mmu1]

Uhhh... What about that whole "I've had a Chaotic Neutral barbarian that would have gutted the Druid for being so pathetically craven... " line?

It's not like this really deserves an explanation, but the character in question was : 1. Intelligent 2. Charismatic 3. In terms of combat tactics, about as far from the "Ugh smash!" stereotype as you can get 4. Loyal to and protecive of other party members, and 5. In response to a repeated pattern of selfish betrayal such as being perpetrated by the Druid, eventually resulting in someone else's death, he'd have gutted him like a fish - if the rest of the party didn't pull him off. (or, given the situation, probably standing in that Psy-Warrior's place, so maybe he'd have been "stupid" and kept on protecting the rest of the party, and gotten killed for it)

 

[Wippit Guud]

12 levels of adventuring teaches you something very, very different. It teaches you the capabilities of your PC and, to a lesser degree, the capabilities of your party and, to a lesser degree, the capabilities of your enemies. It teaches you some of how the party can cooperate together to overcome enemies. It doesn't necessarily teach you to obey orders when they're shouted at you, especially if the importance of doing so hasn't been emphasized outside of battle.

I won't see him as having to obey orders, rather he should know that by, in the lastest example, healing the PsiWar, not only would he be preventing an ally's death, he would be prolonging his own safety by keeping the fighter there to attack and take attacks.

Would he have acted different if it was a dire bear that was doing the fighting? Probably not, and that could almost be seen as breaking a druidic vow to help and animal in need or something.

 

[Tsyr]

Would he have acted different if it was a dire bear that was doing the fighting? Probably not, and that could almost be seen as breaking a druidic vow to help and animal in need or something.

Huh?

 

[Wippit Guud]

Roleplay stuff. Nowhere does it specify what druidic vows are, except for weapon and armor restrictions. Figure a druid has to help an animal in need, though, and a dire bear about to die would defintely fall into that category.

Just ignore it, went off on a tangent.

 

[Tsyr]

The way I read it, he was expecing a healing spell from the druid. I would've stayed if I expected a little healing.

Did he have any legitmate reason to expect this?

The way this sounds, this is a pattern of behaviour for the druid... Not something that just happened out of the blue. Thus, honestly, it doesn't sound like the PsyWar had any real reason to EXPECT a healing spell to come the next turn.

And I'll repeat the question someone else asked... Did the PsyWar fill his end of the bargin? Did he manifest any relevent powers he could have? Start fighting defensivly? Anything?

 

[Pielorinho]

I won't see him as having to obey orders, rather he should know that by, in the lastest example, healing the PsiWar, not only would he be preventing an ally's death, he would be prolonging his own safety by keeping the fighter there to attack and take attacks.

I think we're talking past one another here. My point is that this druid probably NEEDS to learn to follow orders: his own judgement is (IMO) faulty. Were I a PC in his group, I'd insist that he agree, when someone shouts, "Medic!" to use his next action to move toward that person and heal them, regardless of the potential danger to himself.

In this case, I suspect he didn't realize that he was dooming the psychic warrior by his hesitation. The problem is that he placed his own judgement over the psychic's, even though the psychic was in a better position to make a judgement call.

Were I in the party, I'd deal with it by removing the druid's autonomy for awhile, until he's shown that he can make better judgement calls.

Daniel