The druid is not fighting!!! LONG!

[Nasma]

It sounds like Wulf's storyhour all over again. It can get nasty when one player's actions result in the death of another character.

 

[mmu1]

I've had a Chaotic Neutral barbarian that would have gutted the Druid for being so pathetically craven... I wonder, would all the people talking about the "Druid's right to role-play" have defended mine?

Letting someone who was holding enemies back to keep you safe die while you're at full hit points is inexcusable - if I was the Psychic Warrior's player, I'd be trying my best to get the a-hole out of the group, especially if this was a recurring situation.

 

[hong]

I've had a Chaotic Neutral barbarian that would have gutted the Druid for being so pathetically craven... I wonder, would all the people talking about the "Druid's right to role-play" have defended mine?

No, because killing the PCs is MY job as DM, and any player who takes it on himself to do my job for me is asking for a trip out the door.


Hong "will not be out-insaned by a player" Ooi

 

[Umbran]

...and one of the members of said group didn't do anything to contribute to our survival, I would certainly be a bit upset at that individual.

Yes, but it's good to remember that, as described, that's not the situation. Failing to go into melee is not "doing nothing". The druid seems to be casting spells frequently enough. He's just not doing the speciifc thing the party wants him to do - mixing it up hand-to-hand.

 

[rounser]

I've had a Chaotic Evil barbarian that would have gutted the Druid for being so pathetically craven...

Corrected your spelling error for you.

 

[mmu1]

Yes, but it's good to remember that, as described, that's not the situation. Failing to go into melee is not "doing nothing". The druid seems to be casting spells frequently enough. He's just not doing the speciifc thing the party wants him to do - mixing it up hand-to-hand.

As was made clear when the original poster elaborated, the issue wasn't "going into melee", it was "moving 20' when at full hit points and risking some damage to heal someone about to die".

 

[mmu1]

Corrected your spelling error for you.

Typical of the attitude around here so far... Letting a character die because you're a pathetic waste of oxygen is "good roleplaying", making sure someone who (effectively) betrayed his friends doesn't go on living is "Chaotic Evil".

 

[DragonLancer]

Unless your playing a messed up (IMO) camapign, characters should not attack/kill/steal from...etc, other player characters.

The druid in this case made a choice. Live with it.

Letting someone who was holding enemies back to keep you safe die while you're at full hit points is inexcusable - if I was the Psychic Warrior's player, I'd be trying my best to get the a-hole out of the group, especially if this was a recurring situation.

In my game you tried that, it would be you who would be removed from the group. Thats an inexcusable response to someone playing their character. Jeez!

 

[JoeGKushner]

One solution I have used is allowing druids the use of shortbows and longbows. It doesn't make any sense that druids wouldn't be able to use bows, considering their natural ties. This might help alleviate the grumblings from the other players, and give the druid something to do when he is done casting spells.

Well, this is an elf druid too so he should already have something in that area that he can work on.

 

[mmu1]

Unless your playing a messed up (IMO) camapign, characters should not attack/kill/steal from...etc, other player characters.

The druid in this case made a choice. Live with it.

In my game you tried that, it would be you who would be removed from the group. Thats an inexcusable response to someone playing their character. Jeez!

Yes, yes, you made it perfectly clear already that in your game, being a selfish ass is encouraged and rewarded, as long as it means you're "playing your character". No need to repeat yourself.