Who's at fault?

[buzz]

Everyone is still friends to this day 15 years later.

Ha! You suckered us!

This is why I love gaming now more than ever. I'm far more aware of these sorts of issues and how to avoid them. That, and there are actually games that are built to help prevent them.

Lockridge, was this a key moment for your group? What prompted you to post about it?

 

[werk]

Look... No matter how much a DM tries to involve players in what's going on, there are certain situations in which is simply doesn't work. It's unavoidable.

No...no, it's not. You spend 15 mins with the rogue and wiz, then you switch over and spend time with the paladin. The paladin's character didn't sit around for however many hours or days of game-time that went by, he would have done something, even if it was wondering where the rest of his party went and then just wandering around talking to NPCs.

It just seems ridiculous to me to say that ignoring a player for any reason for 3 hours was unavoidable.

 

[Lockridge]

Hey Buzz,
In answer to your question, this was a defining moment for our group. It not only taught us how to avoid this in the future but also taught us a few social graces.

The reason I posted, I have to admit with guilt, was to stir the pot. Although I've lurked for a while, I've only just joined recently. Over the years I've presented other gamers with this situation and I've received many different replies. Basically I thought it would help me get to know my fellow Enworlders.

Nice to meet you all! I think my daughter just woke up otherwise I'd post more details but my guess is she'll be pretty hungry after her nap. (She's a 4 month old cutie by the way with deep brown eyes).
Bye for now.

 

[fusangite]

It seems like everybody has over-reacted.

First of all, I don't see why the wizard's player did not make the list. He could have told the paladin after receiving the information from the rogue.

Sometimes people's sessions are boring because their PC gets sidelined by injury, death or being in the wrong place at the wrong time. People in a longterm campaign should not be concerned about their character being marginalized for one evening.

That stated, the GM could have winged something for the paladin to do to keep him busy. Alternatively, if the paladin's player had continued looking for a way in, it is possible that he could have found it, without the GM having to generate a tangential plot or event at all. The GM's ability to involve the paladin in the session was conditioned to a large degree by how hard the paladin kept looking -- either for the way in or for his fellow party members.

The rogue's player could have been creative and made the paladin vow never to use the information except in certain ways if were told to him. And there are things the wizard's player could have done.

But ultimately, a player spending some time on the sidelines is just not a big enough deal to justify that much fault being assigned to anybody.

EDIT: Having now read Lockridge's final post on the matter, I feel a little more strongly opinionated about the whole thing. No offense but I don't think your group's solution to the question of playing style is one I would want to present as universally good. It's just a style decision that worked for your group.

 

[Odhanan]

Who's at fault for the paladin player's boring evening?

The DM first. You could have had the same in-game result with much more fun for the Paladin's player if the DM didn't spend three hours straight with you guys or he could have invented some reasons for the Paladin to catch up.

This is also a player's responsability to be aware of other players having fun or not, and modify his own attitude, role-play or bring issues to the DM's attention. So you guys are at fault as well.

 

[Pbartender]

No...no, it's not. You spend 15 mins with the rogue and wiz, then you switch over and spend time with the paladin. The paladin's character didn't sit around for however many hours or days of game-time that went by, he would have done something, even if it was wondering where the rest of his party went and then just wandering around talking to NPCs.

It just seems ridiculous to me to say that ignoring a player for any reason for 3 hours was unavoidable.

You misread me... I was saying that the initial situation -- that of a scene in which one or more characters are put into the spotlight, and one or more other characters are relagated to the sidelines -- is unavoidable. Everytime you run into a locked chest it happens on a very small scale... Everyone else sits aside and waits while rogue, searches, disables, opens lock and then appraises.

What isn't unavoidable is being able to minimize the boredom of the uninvolved players... First by considering if there is a way to involve them, second by considering if there is something else they could be doing in the meantime, and lastly by not letting the situation drag on for longer than necessary. While the DM normally takes the primary role doing all this, there's also no reason why the players couldn't be in on it too... "Alright, while the Bard and the Rogue are fishing for leads in the local pubs, I'm heading over to the library at the Mage's Guild and see if I can research some information on the McGuffin we're looking for."

 

[Odhanan]

It just seems ridiculous to me to say that ignoring a player for any reason for 3 hours was unavoidable.

It is indeed ludicrous to say so. It is always avoidable just by paying attention to everyone and then taking steps to increase the entertainment for everyone around the table.

 

[Falkus]

Sometimes people's sessions are boring because their PC gets sidelined by injury, death or being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You know, speaking as a player, I usually have better things to do in the evening than sit around doing nothing for three hours straight. What's in it for me, as a player, to even bother showing up if I'm not going to get to do anything that session?

 

[Numion]

60% Thief player fault. It's never good conduct IMO to ruin another players evening and then hiding behind "Just roleplaying my character."

40% The DMs fault. He could've always made sure the Paladin player was engaged.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

"I'm not having fun. It must be the DM's fault."