The druid is not fighting!!! LONG!

[Pielorinho]

What I don't understand is why many people are trying so hard to shift the blame to someone else. The information, as we have had it related, supports a conclusion that the Druid is a cowardly, selfish git. There is essentially no reason for a party to desire his company. If the rogue or mage were not pulling their weight, there would be complaints. There are not, hence the conclusion that the Druid is the issue.

I rather question any presumption of the Druid's innocence when the best argument in his favor is attempting to blame everyone else.

Buzzard, as I've said: if I find myself in a social situation where people become anxious to lay blame at someone's feet and call them insulting names, I leave that social situation. I don't need that sort of stress.

If this is viewed as an opportunity for roleplaying that everyone will enjoy, excellent. People may enjoy roleplaying the conflict, or they may not, depending on the group and on what else is going on in their lives.

If it's viewed as an opportunity to call names, lay blame, and punish the wrongdoers, well, that's su><><ors. Who wants to have their fun evening turned into bitter recrimination?

Daniel

 

[Schmoe]

Summary and Judgement

Well, I only made it through the first two pages of this discussion, so I apologize if this has already been said. The source of the problem is the expectations of the players. In the example given, it is the expectations of the Druid and the Psychic Warrior.

The Psychic Warrior made a commitment to protecting the weaker members of the party, putting himself at risk to do so. His expectation was that the Druid would come to his aid when he needed it, effectively reciprocating the commitment he had made.

The Druid, on the other hand, has made no commitment to protecting the rest of the group. His expectation is that he will protect himself first, only aiding the party if he can safely do so. He has no intention of reciprocating the commitment others have made to him.

The solution is simple. The rest of the party simply needs to reassess their commitment to the Druid. To be explicit, they need to ignore him. If the Druid wants to contribute, fine, but don't expect it, and certainly don't put yourself on the line for his sake. This avoids the uncomfortable situation of having to remove a PC from a group (obviously an in-character decision), and it has several advantages. First, the rest of the group will no longer feel let-down or betrayed by the Druid, as they have essentially "cut him out" of their plans. Second, after the first few times where the Druid is in serious trouble and no one comes to his aid, he may begin to have a better understanding of what it means to be committed to a group, and in the end he may re-evaluate his position (or he may just get slaughtered while the rest of the party watches).

 

[likuidice]

if the rogue and mage consider their combat jobs to be long range support exclusively, even when a member of the team goes down, then they are not useful members of that team. to expect the druid to perform an action that the rest of those unengaged were not prepared to take is unfair, a little teamwork by all three unengaged pcs would have solved the problem. consequently, it looks like NONE of these people function as a team, instead all of them doing what they consider their role, and not reacting to the needs of the moment. and the druid should certainly not be looked upon as a walking band aid, healing potions should be bought, and if the party runs low on healing, they should retreat, theres nothing to stop them. they don't HAVE to continue on when they've used up a bunch of their resources, if they do so, then they deserve what they get.

 

[National Acrobat]

Clerics and Druids have other roles other than combat. They can support groups in many other ways. I play a cleric that has an 8 str and a 10 dex. Am I prone to getting in melee? Not unless it is absolutely necessary. Do I find interesting ways to use my spells to help others and use my skills in ways that are beneficial? Yes I do. But, if you look at it simply as a numbers issue, melee would kill me quickly due to the lack of armor and strength of my character. My character happens to be a very charismatic and wise character who is the point-person on social interactions, information gathering, energy channeling situations and a very good divine caster. The rest of the players are aware of this. Its the way that I choose to role play my character. No one should be forced to accept a role simply because the BAB chart says something. If people start harassing me, the healing just disappears for awhile...

 

[Schmoe]

likuidice, you make some good points, but I can't assume anything about the situation of the other members of the party. The description we have only gives the actions of the Psychic Warrior and the Druid, and that is what I've based my opinion on.

 

[Henry]

I'll add this one more time for the benefit of those who missed it: There's no problem with discussing the situation and the players and druid's actions, but personal attacks, both on the people and on each other, are NOT ok.

Thanks.

 

[buzzard]

if the rogue and mage consider their combat jobs to be long range support exclusively, even when a member of the team goes down, then they are not useful members of that team. to expect the druid to perform an action that the rest of those unengaged were not prepared to take is unfair, a little teamwork by all three unengaged pcs would have solved the problem. consequently, it looks like NONE of these people function as a team, instead all of them doing what they consider their role, and not reacting to the needs of the moment. and the druid should certainly not be looked upon as a walking band aid, healing potions should be bought, and if the party runs low on healing, they should retreat, theres nothing to stop them. they don't HAVE to continue on when they've used up a bunch of their resources, if they do so, then they deserve what they get.

Ahh yes, HOW DARE!!! that front line fighter expect to be healed by the only person who is able to do so, who the fighter happens to be protecting. Silly me.

I'm curious though, you seem quite fixated on the other team members not doing their part. The fighters were doing their's as meat shields. If the part of the mage and rogue aren't to offer combat support in their own manner ,(spells for a mage, and either ranged or flanking sneak attack for a rogue) what are they to do? Sing fight songs? It's not like they can heal you know. The Druid could, and it is their expectation that he would. Why the heck else would you take a druid along outside of a nature setting?

Apparently you don't see the difference between :
"I've got an owie! Mr. Druid please come kiss it and make it better!"

and
"MEDIC! Give me a hand so I can keep them off you"

The circumstances of why the group was out of healing potions and still in combat has not been clarified. Assesing blame on that basis is fatuous. It may well be that they were ambushed on the way to a resting place. Were you there?

buzzard

 

[ced1106]

Re: And the original poster's take is?

And what does the original poster think and how has the druid's condition gone now that En World has spoken with it's many hydra like heads, some of which can't stop biting at one another?

Well, he could have posted it on a certain other rpg board...

Poster A: "I have a problem player."
Poster B: "d20 is the WORST system ever. You should be playing (insert obscure system here) instead."
Poster C: "WHAT??? There aren't even druids in (insert obscure system here)"
Poster B: "Yeah, well, anyone who plays a system with a druid is an idiot and here's 245 words why!"
Poster C: "I don't see how a druid is a problem."
Poster D: "MY KEWL d02 GAEM WILL HAV DRIUDS AND RAGNERS AND PLADADINS WIHT GUNZ AND GRNADEES. NO WUSSY BOWZ AND ANIMALZ HERE, JUST RIFELS, CANONS, AND TANKZ. YOU CAN PLA WIHT DESE KEWL WEPONZ IN MY NEW SUPPPLENEMT FOR ONYL FIVE DOLLAH$$$!!!"

My hat of messageboards no know limit.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[DanteHayes]

*sigh* So many points to make. Where to start?

If you'd like to opine about the Role-playing vs. Roll-playing, fine, I know I will. But, if you want to express an opinion about the specific situation, make certain that you've read all of the posts by Arbados, the DM.

It has been made explicitly clear that the PsyWar and the Devoted Defender were holding back the force of Drow so; their companions would not be overrun. The Wizard and Rogue were contributing from the second line. They had curative magic items, but had exhausted their supply. The Druid was not a factor. Arbados has also said that, the Druid doesn't put himself into dangerous situations because he wants to make it to Epic levels. As a player, I would drop kick this Druid out of the party faster than you could say "knife".

What's more, I can find no analogous situation that wouldn't result in a similar attitude. If I had an employee at work that, every time a crisis occurred, looked to cover their butt before dealing with the crisis, I would fire them. If I were on a military campaign and someone who wasn't suited to the task of being near the front lines was sent to me, I'd send them back and request some useful aid.

I think it is far too late for this to be solved "in character". Someone died as a result of the Druid's "me first" attitude. I, do, think the DM has some responsibility in this. Surely, you have the players clear their character concepts with you before the campaign begins?

The only solution that comes to my mind would be to allow the Druid player to create a second character that would join the party in some circumstances and take the Druids place. Other times, the Druid might make for the more appropriate character.

 

[DragonLancer]

It has been made explicitly clear that the PsyWar and the Devoted Defender were holding back the force of Drow so; their companions would not be overrun. The Wizard and Rogue were contributing from the second line. They had curative magic items, but had exhausted their supply. The Druid was not a factor. Arbados has also said that, the Druid doesn't put himself into dangerous situations because he wants to make it to Epic levels. As a player, I would drop kick this Druid out of the party faster than you could say "knife".

Have the party never heard of retreating before a superior foe? Obviously not. The rest of the party is at blame as well here. Just standing there trying to hold off a stronger party of Drow seems stupid to me.

If I had an employee at work that, every time a crisis occurred, looked to cover their butt before dealing with the crisis, I would fire them.

Can tell you don't work in big business or for the government then...

I think it is far too late for this to be solved "in character". Someone died as a result of the Druid's "me first" attitude. I, do, think the DM has some responsibility in this. Surely, you have the players clear their character concepts with you before the campaign begins?

How is the DM at fault? Please explain because you have lost me here. It doesn't matter what the concepts are providing they don't conflict, and I don't believe they are (from what I've read).

The only solution that comes to my mind would be to allow the Druid player to create a second character that would join the party in some circumstances and take the Druids place. Other times, the Druid might make for the more appropriate character.

So once again the Druids' player will get the shaft because you don't like the way he plays his character! I really don't understand why you guys are picking on him like this!