Player wants to play....enemies?

[Crow]

We have a sometime player in our group, who due to not ever showing up, and usually having his characters killed when he does due to poor decision-making (Our group is fairly low-op, and the only one that has this consistent trouble with dying is him.), only wants to control and roll for the enemies that the players face. I have done this before, and generally don't mind, so long as everyone is having fun. The only problem though, is mostly a problem for me.

His tactics utterly blow. No matter how idiot-proof I craft an encounter, this guy is capable of turning it into a complete cakewalk for the PC's. Very useful abilities the enemy may have are overlooked, and enemies fail to take advantage of all but the most egregious mistakes by the PC's. At first I thought he was doing it on purpose, but he wasn't.

Also, he refuses to be DM when offered (which would be great so I could play for once). I think he doesn't want to put the prep work in.

Our next game that this guy is supposed to show up, I offered to help him create a character beforehand, or to make him a pregen, but he insists that he would rather play as the enemies. I have some pretty tricky encounters that I'd rather not have him bungle, since our enemies lately have begun to look like Benny Hill stand-ins.

How do I convince this guy to just play the game?

[Vandicus]

You're the DM. Its not up to other people who controls your monsters, its up to you. Tell him that you're controlling the monsters because you're the one who knows how to use them and make them a challenge for the rest of your players.

Try convincing him to play a utility character, possibly a rogue or factotum based around using skills and hiding during combat. A generalist wizard if your group tends to play at higher optimization levels. This way he still gets to feel useful without having to do what he is bad at, namely combat/tactics.

[Urpriest]

While it's often good to let people who are just passing through play the enemies, the key to this is that you don't let them play all the enemies. Give him one enemy champion or the like per encounter, then run the rest yourself. It gives him something to do, and you can pretend that the guy he's running is complex enough that it lowers your workload, but he doesn't wreck the rest of the encounter.

[NOhara24]

Agreeing with the post above. The DM is to control his monsters. If this guy wants to participate, he can play a regular PC, any skill monkey style character or a bulletproof barbarian would suit him. Actually, I think that Barbarians are actually BUILT for those players whose decision making isn't exactly up to snuff. Just back away from him when he goes into a rage.

[Engine]

You're the DM. Its not up to other people who controls your monsters, its up to you. Tell him that you're controlling the monsters because you're the one who knows how to use them and make them a challenge for the rest of your players.

I disagree. You're right, but I feel saying that would seem too confrontational.

@Crow
To convince him to just play the game you should point that his request would steal your fun. You're the DM, you want to play the encounters because this way you have fun at the table: if he does that for you, the game stops being a pleasure for you. The game has to be entertaining for all of you, not just for the players. So if he wants to play the enemies, he could be the DM. If he do not want to be the DM, he should respectfully leave to you the fun to run encounters.

[INDYSTAR188]

Have you considered letting him play an NPC that shows up randomly to interfere w/everyone? For example he could be an agent of some god of trickery who's noticed the PC's. Maybe the PC's find a piece of gear thats haunted or has a genie attached to it. He could play the random agent of fate that shows up randomly to throw wrenches in everyone's game plan.

[Narren]

We have a sometime player in our group, who due to not ever showing up, and usually having his characters killed when he does due to poor decision-making (Our group is fairly low-op, and the only one that has this consistent trouble with dying is him.), only wants to control and roll for the enemies that the players face. I have done this before, and generally don't mind, so long as everyone is having fun. The only problem though, is mostly a problem for me.

His tactics utterly blow. No matter how idiot-proof I craft an encounter, this guy is capable of turning it into a complete cakewalk for the PC's. Very useful abilities the enemy may have are overlooked, and enemies fail to take advantage of all but the most egregious mistakes by the PC's. At first I thought he was doing it on purpose, but he wasn't.

Also, he refuses to be DM when offered (which would be great so I could play for once). I think he doesn't want to put the prep work in.


Why would you want this guy to be the DM? He might be a good friend, but if he doesn't understand the system well enough to play efficiently, why would he be able to DM efficiently?

Now I've had players with a poor grasp of the rules. They needed some help every now and again, but they still had fun and were still a blast to play with. But that's not really possible with the DM (at least in D&D).

[Jude_H]

I'd support Urpriest's suggestion.

See if you can add a straightforward, flashy, but overall inconsequential character or two, let him run those while you manage the more tactically nuanced areas of the encounter.

[shadow_archmagi]

If he doesn't want to play a character, and still hasn't learned the basics, then maybe he shouldn't be playing D&D. It sounds like maybe he isn't a person conducive to good tabletop gaming.

I have friends who we don't play D&D with. We invite them to movie nights on Tuesday, and Chinese Food Night on Wednesday, but not D&D on Sunday, because they refused to learn how to play the game.

I mean, if he isn't playing a character, then you don't have to worry about screwing up party dynamics without him, so it's a purely social decision. If you can get rid of him without hurting his feelings, it could not only improve the game a great deal, but also improve your relationship with him (Because now you won't have the tension caused by him causing problems ingame)

[Knaight]

I'll second the suggestion of just giving him an enemy per fight, and ideally a relatively simple one. I don't see what the appeal of only playing enemies in combat and sitting out during the rest of the time is, honestly, but it seems to be working.

There are a few other options. Maybe he could play an intelligent magic weapon wielded by another PC, which has a couple powers, and is capable of influence through speech. Its a more active role than just enemies, but much less than a full character, which sounds like what the player wants.

[JaronK]

Design encounters with some really low Int enemies, and let him play them flawlessly. Just also have some higher Int enemies that use them. It could be hilarious for him to run around trying to beat up the party with trolls and such while you control the Ogre Mages backing them up.

JaronK

[Safety Sword]

I suggest you man up and lay down the law. :smallwink:

PCs play on that side of the screen and I play on this side. Deal with it.

May seem confrontational, but at least my game isn't ruined by trying to tiptoe around the real issue. The guy isn't any good at tactics that keep him alive. The price for that is constant character generation :smallbiggrin:

Edit: @ Knaight - I personally would make him another PCs magic codpiece, just to get my point across. I don't think being someone's magic weapon is going to be an enjoyable gaming experience. Then again, maybe that's better than screwing the campaign for everyone...

[Knaight]

Edit: @ Knaight - I personally would make him another PCs magic codpiece, just to get my point across. I don't think being someone's magic weapon is going to be an enjoyable gaming experience. Then again, maybe that's better than screwing the campaign for everyone...

I don't think it would be for me either. But we have someone who doesn't want a character, who wants highly limited involvement that seems to focus mostly on combat. Given those restraints, a magic item should be fun. I personally don't get why you wouldn't want a character, or why limited involvement would ever be a good thing, or for that matter why one would want to focus on combat, which means that I can pretty much discard what I find funand assume it will be disliked.

[Kyberwulf]

I say Let him play one of the lackies...that way when your PCs win...

you can have him and you escape...but before you leave..turn to him. and "You fail me Yet again, Starscream."

>.>

[Howler Dagger]

i agree with the let him play only one enemy at a time. If he isnt interfering witth the fun of the party i see no reason that you shouldnt let him. That way he could have fun and (hopefully) the problem would be off your back.

[SowZ]

Yeah, one enemy at a time is a good idea. Let it be a second in command type guy if possible. Even give him a recurring villian or two so he feels like he is part of the story and can get some roleplaying in.

[candycorn]

The problem is... Recurring villains have to survive encounters, generally.

[SowZ]

The problem is... Recurring villains have to survive encounters, generally.

Yeah, but the character doesn't seem to mind dying. So if one villian doesn't get the chance to recur, just try with another. Heh.