I had a player once that went out of his way to thwart anything I had planned. If there was a plot hook meant for him, he'd ignore it. The signs all said go right he'd go left. For example the group was visiting a dwarven keep and the dwarves were rushing around talking about finding something they had lost. Basically a typical plot hook designed for a dwarven PC. He went up to the commander organizing the party of dwarves and told him in no uncertain terms he wasn't interested. The response was "We didn't ask for your help, what the **** are you talking about?"I think that the number of players that deliberately try to sabotage games is very low, but the number of players with a playstyle that will result in sabotage much higher. Some just like the attention being focused on them, some don't see how they role-play their character has to work with the rest of the group and the campaign.
I knew one guy though, that was a deliberate saboteur. His thinking was that if you were a skilled DM, you could handle anything he did.
I hate it when players have their characters do this for the lulz. In a way, D&D is just a big old adolescent power fantasy so I can see why it's appealing to mouth of to the socially powerful without suffering any meaningful consequences. But then I'm sometimes faced with the choice of either ignoring it or ruining the fun for everyone by having the NPC actively work against them.Attacking or mouthing off to socially powerful NPCs
I have a few players who are like that. Part of me wonders if they've suffered under bad DMs in the past and they might be a little gun shy for fear that their current DM will take advantage. But then I have some players I've gamed with for years do whatever they can to avoid plot hooks that directly interest their characters. Oh, maybe I'm the trauma inducing DM?I had a player once that went out of his way to thwart anything I had planned. If there was a plot hook meant for him, he'd ignore it.
I had a player once that went out of his way to thwart anything I had planned. If there was a plot hook meant for him, he'd ignore it. The signs all said go right he'd go left. For example the group was visiting a dwarven keep and the dwarves were rushing around talking about finding something they had lost. Basically a typical plot hook designed for a dwarven PC. He went up to the commander organizing the party of dwarves and told him in no uncertain terms he wasn't interested. The response was "We didn't ask for your help, what the **** are you talking about?"
So that should have been it, right? I have no problem with PCs not being interested in possible threads. But then the guy gloated while laughing that he hadn't been dumb enough to take me up on a side quest custom designed for him. He was proud of himself that once again, he had made me waste time prepping for something that he refused to bite. That wasn't really an issue because I hadn't really prepared much more than a handful of notes just in case and I've always run a very improvisational game anyway (even though people don't realize it).
Nowadays I'd just take him aside after the game and have a chat with him about it and probably politely ask him to find another game. Fortunately he didn't last much longer after that because he just wanted a game where the PCs sat around in a tavern and "things happened". Not sure what that meant exactly because either the DM throw out plot hooks and the players pursue them or the PCs sit around in the tavern drinking until they can't pay their bill and get kicked out.
On the other hand at least he wasn't playing a 7 ft tall albino elf with no weapons or spells of any kind. Nor did he want to play a half dragon half vampire with a cape that fluttered in the nonexistent wind. Ah well, those players weren't problematic ... just odd.
I hate it when players have their characters do this for the lulz. In a way, D&D is just a big old adolescent power fantasy so I can see why it's appealing to mouth of to the socially powerful without suffering any meaningful consequences. But then I'm sometimes faced with the choice of either ignoring it or ruining the fun for everyone by having the NPC actively work against them.
I have a few players who are like that. Part of me wonders if they've suffered under bad DMs in the past and they might be a little gun shy for fear that their current DM will take advantage. But then I have some players I've gamed with for years do whatever they can to avoid plot hooks that directly interest their characters. Oh, maybe I'm the trauma inducing DM?
The worst type of bad layer I've had to deal with is what I call the "bad optimizer." As in, they want to powergame/optimize, but they're bad at doing that and make crap characters instead.
So they end up with a paladin who's best stat is wisdom and they dumped charisma, complaining that their spells don't work. Or the studded-leather polearm fighter who's less tanky than the sword-and-board heavy armor paladin but the fighter wants to tank. Or the rogue who doesn't do a lot of damage because called shots cause disadvantage on the attack rolls (and therefore miss a lot, in a addition to not doing much damage). Or the trip-based character with no attacks to follow up with, because they have their free hand on the net (the other's on the horse's reins).
And you can't offer advice - they won't listen. After all, if they listened, they would have seen the advice about wearing heavy armor or putting your best stat numbers into key abilities for your class.
So they sit there and sulk, because the tough customer concept in their mind isn't what's happening at the table - and it's their own fault but they just can't see how smaller bonuses to rolls means you succeed less.
My husband. Lol! He is a very reluctant player, but we sometimes need him. At those times, it is almost impossible to find a set time to play, because he always has reasons to avoid it.There are lots of stories in recent threads about domineering and unreasonable DMs, and about rules that aren't needed because no player would ever be that extreme. And there's apparently an old poll that shows the majority of DMs are bad.
I feel left out, because I've been lucky enough to never run into a really bad DM or legendarily bad player (well, one, but they were 10 and got better in a few sessions). I've read about some of the bad DMs on here (eek!)... but haven't seen the bad player stories. So, any stories out there of players who have their paladin turn into a homicidal maniac on a dime? Anyone wanting to be a class or concept not banned in session 0 that turned into a nightmare later and wouldn't be reined in? Anyone you've had to bring consequences on because you thought their play required it even if it led to the player not having fun? (Town guard on the un-clever thief?) Or are all the players angels (until some become DM and let their badness show).
A) please tell me you let the poor guy know what was going on... (to be clear, not the racist; his(?) target)I know I've told this one in another thread. But the first group I ran into here in Arkansas invited me to their place to play some AD&D 1st edition (in 2001). One of the players was black and when he left the room for some reason another one of the players referred to him as an N word. I made my excuses, left, and never looked back.
Most of my problematic player stories are pretty tame. Back in my 3E days, I was running games for a local club and a dude who hadn't played in years showed up to one of our events with his daughter (16-17) in tow. One of the other players (early 20s) was macking on her (unsuccessfully) throughout the entire game. For some odd reason we never saw them at another club event again.
I had another player in the club who would often swear. I'm no prude, but when you're gaming at a public event, especially in mixed crowds of minors and adults, I think people should watch their language. It got bad enough that I started avoiding sitting at tables with that guy. Hell, this is actually two people. I had another guy who was like that but he didn't just swear he made completely inappropriate comments. He toned down his mannerisms when the attractive waitress came to take our order and when I asked why he couldn't be like that more often he loudly said, "I'm not trying to naughty word you." Yeah, that was it for me.
They all knew one another quite well and I was in a situation where I was in the home of near strangers and very outnumbered so wasn't interested in getting into a conflict.A) please tell me you let the poor guy know what was going on... (to be clear, not the racist; his(?) target)
I later found out that this guy had a habit of hitting on any woman with a pulse. It's just that most of our group was made of men so I rarely had any opportunity to take notice.B) Fricking ewww.
I have a juvenile sense of humor and can swear with the, well, not on a Scotsman level, but it's not something that offends me in private spaces. It's the public spaces where it bothers me.C) As a Scotsman, I have been that right sorry c... anute? more regularly than I would like and, yeah. Not on you.