Whiney players....

[Sol.Dragonheart]

They couldn't flee.

And that, right there, is the problem. You're taking away what little independence the PCs have by creating situations like this, and that will create discontent. You claim that your friend never admits when he made a mistake, or when he's wrong, yet you seem just as unwilling to evaluate the situation objectively and see if you have also made mistakes.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Eff you and your common sense, Crowking!

Just used up my quota for the year, too.......

RC

 

[Jedi_Solo]

Commenting as a player... And admittedly as as someone who didn't read every detail of the last couple of pages (so I appologize if I ask a question that was already answered).

I don't like the sound of this last dungeoun. Magic immune golumns and high DR undead? That would put any primary spellcaster into a slump. I have no problem with letting others have the limelight, but I want to be useful in the session as a whole if not a particular fight. And I will always want to be useful in the Big Bad fight even if I'm not fighting the big bad. Maybe I'm keeping the lower level masses off the people fighting the big bad. Maybe I'm the one running around with potions and scrolls keeping others up and fighting. Sure, I won't be the one to steal the spotlight for that session, but at least I'll be doing SOMETHING. Those golums fights I when it was my turn I literaly said "I twiddle my thumbs" because I had nothing to do. I looked over my character sheet. I had run out of acid based spells and items. My crossbow wasn't getting past the DR of the critters. I... had... nothing! That session was not fun.

I have sat out multiple fights in a row (magic immunity issues). One fight was okay, it was designed to let the fighters shine and they deserved to. The problem was that it happened two or three fights in a row. I was very, very bored by the end of the session. Fortunately my DM learned his lesson and it hasn't happened since (at least from my point of view).

A tip to DMs: even if it doesn't make much sense, put something in the dungeon for the PC you know is going to get hosed for the session. Very high spell resistance? FInd something that doesn't have it. Golumn and undead? Have vermin or spiders for the rogue to backstab. It'll go a long way to say "I know this session will not be your best and I am sorry."

And for verification...

Did I pick up that they are a 10th level party with 15th level gear? That could easily be the cause of battles either being too-easy (too good gear for 10th level fights) or too-hard (don't have the stats for a 15th level fight). That is not easy to balance.

 

[Slaygrim]

Then again, maybe not. Slaygrim seems resistant to that line of questioning;

I already said that I could have done things a little better and that I am not 100% innocent. The entire point of the thread is that I have a player who has always complained, always brought down the entire party if he doesn't get his way, etc.

I am going to try a few new things with him, and if that doesn't work I will not game with him anymore.

 

[Slaygrim]

This is exactly not what Ridley's Cohort is saying. If your adventure design is based on verisimilitude, then Iron Golems and undead in a sealed crypt makes perfect sense. You did however appeal to the idea that your players should trust you not to run them through anything that they couldn't reasonably manage.

These two adventure design philosophies are not always at odds, but neither are they always consistent with one another. He suggests, while not condoning the actions taken by Whiner, that it may frustrate a player to have to both deal with a simulationist game world and trust that you wouldn't present them with anything that will simply mop the floor with them.

Does that make more sense?

I guess. My players should trust that I am not going to outright kill them for no reason. That's the trust I am talking about. No one I know wants to game with a DM who is going to kill them off.

Sure, they may end up facing a battle they can't win, but if that ever happens, it's going to be a part of a story, not so I can chuckle at them for dying.

This particular battle that has generated so much talk on here, it was part of a story. The ritual the 19th level mage was doing was to free his Netherese Ancestor who was imprisioned 2000 years ago. This is going to tie in to the epic campaign I will be running later on in the future. I have a lot of ideas for that campaign and I am going to be trying a lot of new things to make it more fun for the players. I am learning as we go along what they like and what they don't.

 

[Arnwyn]

Obviously you don't get it. So far you have told us your adventures consist of...

- railroad plots
- An NPC that outshines the party and comes to the rescue
- Multiple encounters designed to render this players character virtually useless
- but also some other good stuff as well (it ain't all bad)

Wow. I read this whole thread, and got nothing of the sort.

Sounds like grasping and typical ENWorld criticizing, to me.

I'm with the OP - the whining player sounds like a git.

 

[Slaygrim]

I love how you seem to imply nothing could be wrong with your DM style, yet keep posting stuff like this.

Dude, seriously, wtf? Get off my ass.

A) I never said that there was nothing wrong with my DMing style. No DM has nothing wrong with their DMing style.

B) I have consistently been saying that there are some things I need to adjust. I am learning what the players like and they don't like.

C) MOST players have very very few complaints. This one player, his complaints in one session usually outdo the complaints of 3 other players over several sessions. Not only that, but the player directly challenges me in the middle of the campaign, is condescending to me, and pouts in his chair, ruining the time of everyone, even if no one else is complaining.

But if you want to sit there and keep pointing the finger at me, the one trying to work this out and make things better, fine.

Obviously you don't get it. So far you have told us your adventures consist of...

- railroad plots
- An NPC that outshines the party and comes to the rescue
- Multiple encounters designed to render this players character virtually useless
- but also some other good stuff as well (it ain't all bad)

and you still think he's the one totally at fault for complaining. Maybe he didn't go about things the right way but he has some valid complaints.

I have repeatedly said it is not all the player, but this player DOES have major issues with whining. If it were everyone, then I would assume it is almost completely on me, but since it is always that one player voicing his displeasure when everyone else is fine, I'm sorry, but I am going to be thinking that the major issue is how this guy plays the game.

As far as rendering the PC's useless... give me a break. They had an ally for ONE BATTLE and this guy did defeat the 16th level sorcerer, but the PC's walked through the beholder and the runic guardian in 2 rounds. They were FAR from rendered useless.

Railroading... yes, some of that went on, and that is something I really am trying to work with fixing. I didn't need to be told that to realize it, I have been realizing it as I was DMing and I am working on opening things up a LOT more with the next campaign.

With multiple encounters that render the player useless. Not so. It merely changed the role he had to play, and that's just how it works sometimes. You explore an ancient wizard ruins you will be finding some constructs. I am not going to keep constructs out of a sealed 2000 year old ruin because they are immune to a good portion of spells. Sometimes the PC's will face something like this. In such an occasion it's time for that player to show a little ingenuity by either summoning something to fight, using a wall of force to effect the battlefield, buff other players, etc. If you just want to hurl fireballs then yeah, you're going to miss out on doing what you want sometimes. That's just the way it goes.

I am not going to play a rogue and then complain I cannot sneak attack undead when I raid a lich's lair.

If the first dungeon you run has Iron Golems, and undead with SR, and he feels useless and complains. Then the next dungeon also has Iron Golems, isn't he going to feel like you just ignored him? Does he know you changed it from 100% Iron Golems to a couple and Helmed Horrors instead?

These two dungeons were 4 adventures apart. He wasn't useless against them, in fact, the only reason the players won the battle against the Death Knight, was BECAUSE this player buffed them up so much that they were ridiculous. In that first dungeon there were two golems. But in there, there was also MANY encounters where he could unload his memorized spells. He was by no means sitting there throughout the adventure.

As was mentioned before, this player likes to see his character as the leader, the only one who matters, etc. He attaches a lot of ego to his character. So, if he faces an opponent that he cannot defeat, he gets pissy. If he feels like he isn't the center show, such as a battle with a golem, then he doesn't like it. He can't sit back and let the other players have their time in a sun. This is a flaw HE has. This isn't me.

Did he know I changed a lot of those constructs over? No. He doesn't need to know everything I do behind the DM screen. But this definitely fed my aggravation that when I catered to him behind the scenes, and he still complains.

The best way I can handle this is to have a talk, hash out our problems, and make it a standard to discuss this after the game and not during. If we cannot work it out, then we'll just have to stop gaming together.

 

[Slaygrim]

And that, right there, is the problem. You're taking away what little independence the PCs have by creating situations like this, and that will create discontent. You claim that your friend never admits when he made a mistake, or when he's wrong, yet you seem just as unwilling to evaluate the situation objectively and see if you have also made mistakes.

Well apparently you cannot read, as I have consistently been saying that there are things I am working on improving with. And I don't make every encounter like this one, this one-as I have said numerous times-is critical for the next big campaign. The PC's were to witness (after the ritual) the return of this imprisoned Netherese Arcanist Halicron Indrid. So yes, this one was railroaded a bit, but for good reason. It's not like every single battle is like this. This was the conclusion of a 10 adventure campaign.

 

[Felix]

I guess. My players should trust that I am not going to outright kill them for no reason. That's the trust I am talking about. No one I know wants to game with a DM who is going to kill them off.

Sure, they may end up facing a battle they can't win, but if that ever happens, it's going to be a part of a story, not so I can chuckle at them for dying.

I don't think folks think you made that encounter to laugh at them; I don't anyway. But take a look at these two paragraphs: how is a player supposed to know when something is "part of the story"? If their actions are usually based on the idea that you'll give them stuff they can handle, and they run face-first into your story-encounters, they may get frustrated.

Just cautionary, man.

 

[evilbob]

The best way I can handle this is to have a talk, hash out our problems, and make it a standard to discuss this after the game and not during. If we cannot work it out, then we'll just have to stop gaming together.

I think this is an excellent conclusion, and wish you luck.