Whiney players....

[WhatGravitas]

You think that's bad? Heaven forbid the guy gets hit by a Mordenkainens Disjunction and loses magical items. It's time to turn his character around and head back to town, forsaking his quest because he doesn't have his items.

Well, this point is actually valid. In 3.5E you're vastly underperforming without magic items. Disjunction is one of these spells, that should die ASAP. For the first part, that's different, unless you are doing that immunity-stuff very often.

It seems to stem from two problems: Metagame knowledge - do they actually know the wizards' levels, or how does he judge it as "too powerful" (though it's true - a well-played 19th level wizard is able to mop the floor with almost everything - time stop, death cloud, wall of force/forcecage combo is almost unbeatable).

Furthermore, the player seemingly likes a challenge that he can win (not encounters that are too weak or too strong). Sit down with him, talk to him about it, and tell him to do that after the session.

Then start incorporating some of his wishes - just throw him an occasional bone, as long it's not at the expense of the other players.

If the still whines... well, come again or kick him. But talk first.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Rackhir]

No. He doesn't.

I guess I'm a bit surprised by posts like, "I agree with the whiner," but I am sorry: that is wrong. I know because I have had to deal with THIS EXACT SAME SITUATION. It is downright eerie how close the OP's rant is to a description of one of my long-time gaming friends. I COMPLETELY sympathize with the OP. To anyone who has not experienced this: I'm sorry, but you cannot justify the whiner's behavior. He is wrong. What he is doing is not constructive and in fact poisonous to entire gaming experience - and it ruins the fun for everyone.

Nobody was agreeing with the player being a whiner. What we were agreeing with is that these encounters were poorly designed and far more lethal than a party at that level should be facing. Also that the last dungeon described, certainly seemed designed specifically to gimp the whiner's character.

However annoying the whining might be and you may well be right about how obnoxious the player is. It doesn't change the fact that there are some serious flaws in the way the OP was designing those encounters.

Or do you like campaigns where the NPC get all of the glory and are the protagonists?

 

[jdrakeh]

However annoying the whining might be and you may well be right about how obnoxious the player is. It doesn't change the fact that there are some serious flaws in the way the OP was designing those encounters.

I agree. Whining is not the answer. What the whiner should have done was find another game with a DM who is capable of following the RAW with regard to balancing average party level against antagonist CR and who doesn't design adventures to either hinge on the intervention of DMPCs or deliberately make the characters of players near useless in actual play.

 

[evilbob]

What we were agreeing with is that these encounters were poorly designed and far more lethal than a party at that level should be facing...

Wow.

I cannot believe how many attacks have been levied against the OP based on the examples he gave while talking about a honest problem with another player. Talk about nit-picking the example! I mean, honestly: how can anyone judge this guy and his campaign based on one encounter he mentions? That's absurd. And besides that: it's not the point. The point is the OP's relationship with this other person. It is not whether or not he's a good GM, and frankly that is immaterial.

Or do you like campaigns where the NPC get all of the glory and are the protagonists?

I'm sorry but what are you even talking about? Who said (other than people who are not in the campaign and have no idea whatsoever) that his entire campaign is all about NPC glory and the players never get any love? Talk about unsubstantiated assumptions...


Look, I agree that this thread is in the wrong forum, but there's no reason to jump all over a guy's examples when that's clearly not what he's talking about. He's dealing with an issue with another player, not looking for advice on whether or not an encounter - which he honestly has not even explained to the point where anyone could give any sort of reasonable opinion about - is a fair one or not.


And to the OP: I realize that my above post did not emphasize this clearly enough: I think you should try roguerouge's advice first. Everyone deserves (multiple) second chances, and who knows? It may even work out great. But just don't hold your breath - and if that doesn't work, please try my advice.

 

[atom crash]

I can certainly commiserate with your player. In my first 3rd Edition gaming experience, I played a rogue/wizard, and all we ever fought were undead. My character was less than useless, and as a result I didn't have a whole lot of fun when we played. It would have helped if the DM had told me when we started that we'd be facing a lot of undead and I'd probably be dissatisfied with my character choice, but instead I got to sit around watching the other players do cool stuff, all the while wondering why I even bothered showing up.

This was mostly just a rant. He's taking over DMing now, so I won't have to put up with it for awhile. I get to play and I am really resisting the urge to give him loads of trouble and a taste of his own medicine.

This is most certainly NEVER the correct response. What you need is better communication with the player.

I agree with Rackhir that there seems to be a lack of trust between this player and you, the DM. When faced with such an overwhelming opposition, he needed to hear you tell him, "Trust me. I know what I'm doing." Instead, he just sat there staring down the barrel of what to him was obviously a TPK in the making. For most players, that's not a whole lot of fun. Neither is a disjunction (unless the players are used to you handing out a truckload of magic items).

 

[Rackhir]

Wow.

I cannot believe how many attacks have been levied against the OP based on the examples he gave while talking about a honest problem with another player. Talk about nit-picking the example! I mean, honestly: how can anyone judge this guy and his campaign based on one encounter he mentions? That's absurd. And besides that: it's not the point. The point is the OP's relationship with this other person. It is not whether or not he's a good GM, and frankly that is immaterial.

So you think a cr 20 encounter is appropriate for a 10th lvl party? He mentions a series of battles any one of which probably should have been a TPK. Then a dungeon that renders the players character almost completely useless. That is not a single encounter.

Is it an attack to say that the DM was creating poorly designed encounters? The OP seemed to think these fights were reasonable. Despite it being a +10 cr encounter, which is into the realm of instant death.

The nature of these encounters is highly relevant to the problems between the Player and the DM. The player is justly complaining that the first set of encounters described is far too lethal. That he might be doing so in an obnoxious and irritating fashion, doesn't make it irrelevant.

Both the OP and the player have some problems. Though we only have the OP's word for it that the player is even being a whiner. So even if the player is being a complete and total toe rag about things. It doesn't change the fact that there seem to be some serious problems with how the DM creates and designs his encounters.

It's a D&D game, the quality of the DMing has a great deal to do with how much fun a campaign is. A bad DM can ruin the best module or story and a great one can redeem the worst material.

I'm sorry but what are you even talking about? Who said (other than people who are not in the campaign and have no idea whatsoever) that his entire campaign is all about NPC glory and the players never get any love? Talk about unsubstantiated assumptions...

The DM created a series of encounters that hinged entirely upon a significantly higher level NPC doing (and yes I am doing some reading in between the lines here) most of the fighting for the PCs. The entire series of encounters would have been pretty much a series of TPKs if it were not for the presence and power of the NPC. That sounds to me like the very definition of a DMPC.

Look, I agree that this thread is in the wrong forum, but there's no reason to jump all over a guy's examples when that's clearly not what he's talking about. He's dealing with an issue with another player, not looking for advice on whether or not an encounter - which he honestly has not even explained to the point where anyone could give any sort of reasonable opinion about - is a fair one or not.

Everyone who's posted has been doing their best to be fair to the OP. However we can only judge based on what he's posted so far and what he has posted seems to support most of what the player was complaining about.

 

[jdrakeh]

Everyone who's posted has been doing their best to be fair to the OP.

Personally, I have no interest in being fair, only honest. I'd be lying if I told the OP that throwing 20th Level enemies at a 10th level party was good DMing. Or if I told him that attempting to balance out said departure from the rules with an NPC that vastly outclasses the PCs was good DMing. Or that designing a dungeon that specifically penalizes certain PCs with regard to taking action was good DMing. None of that is good DMing.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I'll bump this over to General RPG Discussion!

 

[werk]

The player seems to know the level and CR of opponents, which is really the problem. Are you telling the players that their enemy is a 19th level necromancer or do you say he is a powerful necromancer?

The fact is that you can dramatically reduce the challenge level of an encounter with other variables, and that is easily within the power of a DM. A great example of this is low level PCs dropping a stalactite to kill a sleeping dragon (or I2k's example). It makes for epic play at non epic levels...basically DM supplied luck.

It seems to me the best solution is to keep the player in the dark as much as possible, his meta is getting in the way of his game.


If you are trading off DMing, make sure you have two separate campaigns.

 

[Felix]

If I were the whiner's caster and I found myself in the midst of a 19th level wizard, a 15th level wizard, a 16th level sorcerer, a beholder, and a runic guardian, all of whom are apparent enemies, I'd either cast Teleport at first opportunity, taking as many other PCs as I could with me, or I'd kill the other PCs and offer my services to try to save my own bacon.

That encounter is horrifying; it's still fantastically scary if you know that the 15th level wizard (the weakest of the 3 casters arrayed against you) is on your side. And he didn't.

So I don't think vocal reluctance is out of order.