PDA

View Full Version : Dealing with a player who has to "discuss" every single action.



Lictor of Thrax
2011-11-30, 03:56 PM
We have a small group going, we're all tight friends and generally can work most things out pretty simply but there has been one continuing problem in our group which has made our sessions get a bit heated or, conversely, so slow that I can't even stay awake. The problem being that we have a player who wants to discuss, plot and plan just about every damn thing we do. He does it both in character and out of character which has caused both the characters AND the players to get a bit short tempered with him and it also can frequently slow down the game so much that I end up struggle to stay awake as the sessions run late with little to no action..

At first myself and the third player just sort of teasing needled him about it, hoping he'd catch the hint. Then I started trying to make an IC attempt to push the action a bit and stop Hemming and having about everything. I've also talked to him OOC about how sometimes we need to just think not only about what our characters would do (which isn't always the most thought t out plan of action) but also what our characters *could* do..

An example would be that there was a slight break in my character and his character's actions during combat while the DM went over some stuff with the third player, we went outside to steal a quick smoke and he started talking to me about what we should do. I told him flat out, "my character is up in a mast chasing down Naki to kill that <insert profanity}>". Trying to point out that we're in the middle of heated combat, not near eachother and my character desperately wanted to kill this woman... He continued to try and strategize and micromanage the combat until I somewhat testily told him, "Look, we're in the middle of combat.. Yes, each round takes US a while to get through at times but in game, this is all fluid action - my character doesn't have time to sit and discuss precisely the absolute best course of combat while he's running along a mast-pole trying to stop a were-rat from lighting our sails on fire."

He just doesn't seem to fully get the IC/metagaming aspect and I feel like *I've* exausted my abilities to try and coach him a bit without: A) directly telling him that we all think he's playing wrong - something that won't go over well. B) eventually just snapping at him.

He already feels like the third player and I are sort of gagging up on him at times but he gets absurdly defensive and butthurt at any sort of blunt criticism.
EDIT: When I try and bring these things up he points out that he's just trying to do what's best and help out the party as much as possible.. He has good intentions and I don't want to make him feel all self conscious about playing and enjoying an otherwise fun and easy going game amongst friends.. But he's obviously starting to wear on our sessions and tempers.

There has to be people out there who've delt with similar issues and have handled them better than we have thus far.

GungHo
2011-11-30, 04:22 PM
Add a structure/agenda to the game.

1) Talky/planning/monty python joke time.
2) Break.
3) Play.
4) Break.
5) After-action review.

When someone deviates from that, say, "we will get to that later, but now we need to play because this is play time". It's like running a meeting at work.

valadil
2011-11-30, 04:25 PM
I've had one of those. I think it's the GM's responsibility to keep the game well paced. Whomever GMs for this player needs to be a hardass about limiting communication in combat.

However, I'd also encourage planning outside of combat as a way to let this player get his fix of micromanagement.

For instance, one of my 3.5 groups came up with the following maneuver. I was playing the bard. Two melee characters would stand in front of me with a space in between them. We did this before opening any big scary doors. When the door opened, I had a readied action to dimension door the three of us into the room, with the two melees flanking whatever I decided was the biggest threat. Sometimes we did it during combat too.

That tactic is too big to communicate in combat. There's too much verbiage. We took a moment out of game to discuss the tactic. It was named something like tele-flank. Now that it had a tiny name any of us could call out in a free action it was something we could use in fights.

Let the out of game planning and naming of maneuvers satisfy your friend's need to plan.

Lictor of Thrax
2011-11-30, 04:53 PM
I'll definitely talk to the DM and try and work in those suggestions.

The frustrating thing is that it's not just combat that his chronic need to overthink everything happens in.. It's *everything*. Even simple, most likely pointless decisions - should we stop by the sheriff's first or the the arcanist's? - can turn into debates about which one would be "better". Part of it is our own fault, we play a pretty fast-and-loose game and will make off-hand jokes all the time... I just really don't know how to explain to him to cut it out with all the metagaming overthinking. He's read up, he understands - at least on paper... But he still does it constantly.

At first I tried to respond to it when he was going overboard by just having my char get impatient with his char and thus having him just go do what he wants, forcing him to make a choice or get left behind but doing that didn't really change anything.

Any suggestions on friendly ways to tell him, "Hey, there's a world going on here and we've just spent 10 minutes real life time to make a 10 second decision."?

I'll also talk to the DM and see if he can come up with some IC and OOC ways of addressing the subject. Something like, "Sorry, the sheriff just left a couple minutes ago." when we've just spent 10 minutes useless squabbling over trivial decisions. Or perhaps the DM just flatly saying, at times that we've gotten caught up debating some trivial decision, "Look, just pick one or I'm rolling a dice to see which way you go."

RandomNPC
2011-11-30, 05:37 PM
I've got a guy who does this with everything, down to leveling up. Always asking "Who wants me to take this ability?" or "Who thinks X is a good idea?"

He took so long in combat last week I said "Look, pick a way to go, it's your character" and the DM said "Do something" and started a countdown.

He let the DM finish the countdown and asked "Is that ok if I do that?" and when the DM asked what he pointed at someone and said "That" like we all knew what he wanted him to do.

....

yea........

navar100
2011-11-30, 06:48 PM
I've had one of those. I think it's the GM's responsibility to keep the game well paced. Whomever GMs for this player needs to be a hardass about limiting communication in combat.

However, I'd also encourage planning outside of combat as a way to let this player get his fix of micromanagement.

For instance, one of my 3.5 groups came up with the following maneuver. I was playing the bard. Two melee characters would stand in front of me with a space in between them. We did this before opening any big scary doors. When the door opened, I had a readied action to dimension door the three of us into the room, with the two melees flanking whatever I decided was the biggest threat. Sometimes we did it during combat too.

That tactic is too big to communicate in combat. There's too much verbiage. We took a moment out of game to discuss the tactic. It was named something like tele-flank. Now that it had a tiny name any of us could call out in a free action it was something we could use in fights.

Let the out of game planning and naming of maneuvers satisfy your friend's need to plan.

Oh thank you! My Sorcerer will eventually know Dimension Door. I must use that tactic.

Dr.Epic
2011-11-30, 06:50 PM
Limit the amount of time they can discuss things and if they exceed this their character stalls and the NPCs can do whatever.

Dingle
2011-11-30, 07:02 PM
I was that guy in my group for a while, and I've been trying hard to tone it down lately.

The planning/discussing was all justifiable IC*, but it was bogging down the game horribly and it took ages to do anything. This made the game less fun for everyone else. The worst part was that I didn't realise until someone mentioned that the game was very slow and not as much fun for them as the last game.

This is a metagame problem,
but not metagaming iself is not the problem (see http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307KmEm4H9k6efFP.html for good metagaming, which is what I think we need here.)

solutions I think would work: (in no particular order)
1: telling them: "You're taking too long and it's making the game less fun for everyone else" (it worked for me, to the extent that I try not to do it)

2: Make it clear that the decision will have no effect. (should completely eliminate the problem at the expense of making the game feel more railroaded) (this never happened in obviously railroaded games)

3: abstract minor decisions: ask them what they want to achieve, roll an int/wis check and just tell them the "better" one

4: make more of the outcomes of the decision clear, possibly also by rolling knowledges. (this cuts out a lot of the thinking)

5: have a time limit on decisions, IC (other party members just walk off) or OOC (egg timer, or give players a way to signal they've had enough)

6: ask the player to play a charachter who doesn't have any authority.
(that was my first time trying to be a leader/face charachter)

*The choice between taking the mountain pass or the abandoned mine is a major choice IC, and will hugely affect the next week of IC time, and could be life or death for all the charachter knows. Meaning that an hour of considering the risks of each direction is reasonable enough IC.
Unfortunately, it would probably take less than that amount of time to play out either choice and most GMs won't kill PCs over something like that.
So it feels like 1/2 the time is wasted to the other players despite everything being entirely IC.

flumphy
2011-11-30, 07:04 PM
I've had DMs who houserule an IC speech limit of six words per combat round. This actually isn't a rule I personally agree with, but it's certainly an idea that could help with your issue.

theflyingkitty
2011-11-30, 07:44 PM
Go find yourself a small hourglass (like from a board game) that does maybe a minute. Then give each person that ONE MINUTE per turn of combat to decide WHAT they want to do. And no backsies.

Combat should be quick. Offer this guy the challange of making the fast decisions you'd have to make in battle.

It's actualy quite a bit of fun and often keeps encounters from dragging on for hours.

Traab
2011-11-30, 07:57 PM
Go find yourself a small hourglass (like from a board game) that does maybe a minute. Then give each person that ONE MINUTE per turn of combat to decide WHAT they want to do. And no backsies.

Combat should be quick. Offer this guy the challange of making the fast decisions you'd have to make in battle.

It's actualy quite a bit of fun and often keeps encounters from dragging on for hours.

This. Enforce a timer and say, "If you dont decide what to do before the timer goes off, you lose your turn that round."

Dimers
2011-11-30, 10:15 PM
When I try and bring these things up he points out that he's just trying to do what's best and help out the party as much as possible...

If he wants to help the party, as in the characters, he's thinking overly hard about completely fictional beings. And apparently he's doing so in a way that can't readily be justified, thinking ten minutes when his character has to make a split-second decision.

If he wants to help out the players, well, he needs to change tactics because you guys are totally not feeling better.

Lictor of Thrax
2011-11-30, 11:04 PM
If he wants to help the party, as in the characters, he's thinking overly hard about completely fictional beings. And apparently he's doing so in a way that can't readily be justified, thinking ten minutes when his character has to make a split-second decision.

If he wants to help out the players, well, he needs to change tactics because you guys are totally not feeling better.

That's one of the biggest issues of the problem. He understands what OOC/IC and metagaming are on paper but he doesn't seem to fully get it when it comes to playing.

Another example from a couple games ago.. Our characters are all going to bed and we have nothing lined up in particular for the next day. In fact, I play a sort of foppish drunken sociopath so my plans are to go clothes shopping on the morrow. He then asks us what spells he should prepare. We both tell him, "whatever you want, I don't give a ****."

He then presses the issue further and I try and sort of again give him a nudge that we should try and keep this a little more IC and respond with, "Well **** if I know what you should study in that little book of yours, is there a spell that can summon up some decent looking whores? The selection in this town is horrible!"

He kept on with it and I just walked outside to have a smoke. I even talked to him about it and brought it up that the game was getting too bogged down with stuff like that and he, of course, brought up that was just trying to help. I tried to tell him, "Look, if you ask my character, he doesn't care. He doesn't care if you spend every last spell slot on a spell to paint bunnies and then get your head lopped off the next day. If you're asking ME, out of character, well, we can save that discussion for later... Or hell, maybe we'll simply end up being unprepared and regret not spending the time to think things through but there's a difference between what *I* think is the best answer and what my character thinks is the best answer."

He just seems to have a hard time fully getting that.

That said, there were plenty of excellent ideas I'm going to bring up to my DM about all this. It's his first time doing a real campaign and I think he's still getting the hang of the fact that he, ultimately, is in the position to control the pace and might have to exert a little more authority.

EDIT: Based on some of the suggestions from here I think I'll propose this to the DM and see if he likes it and will enforce it to the group. My idea is that when our characters are in theoretical down time, like travelling for a couple hours to get to a place or just sitting around drinking before passing out, the we use that time as players to come up with some of the strategy and decision making we might need to do when we're actually in the thick of things. Then, when we run in to an encounter of some kind we can (before the encounter truly starts) step outside for a smoke (since our combat runs kind of slow anyhow and we usually do step outside before a major event) and we can do some basic in-Character plotting for what our tactics will be, justifying it by saying that that is what we were doing earlier.

I think that might help the DM exert a little more authority, as well, because if someone starts getting a bit too ooc/metagamey while we're playing he can just stifle them with, "Sorry, but you don't have time for all that. Act now or lose your turn."

Traab
2011-11-30, 11:23 PM
The timer idea is really only helpful in mid battle, because it makes sense to cut short the talking in the middle of combat, it wouldnt make sense in the question about spells thing. Though that last example about spells sounded more like he wasnt really sure about what he should do and really didnt want to mess it up. Is he fairly new to the game? Or at least to the class?

Lictor of Thrax
2011-11-30, 11:40 PM
The timer idea is really only helpful in mid battle, because it makes sense to cut short the talking in the middle of combat, it wouldnt make sense in the question about spells thing. Though that last example about spells sounded more like he wasnt really sure about what he should do and really didnt want to mess it up. Is he fairly new to the game? Or at least to the class?
He's very well versed in the game itself, but hasn't played a lot of D&D.. And he's never played a cleric.

Unfortunately, I have *by far* the most table time but I've also usually been fortunate to have terrific DMs who've really known how to control the table.. I've never really had to try and coach/guide people and I sometimes feel like I'm coming off a bit to bullish (and I don't want the DM to feel like I'm trying to run his game away from him.)

After reading through this thread, I think ultimately we all just need to sit down and discuss some guidelines about when, what, where and why it's OK to do certain things. The game started off super casual and I think we all just assumed that everything would just work itself out naturally since we all have similar mindsets to gaming.. Now I'm definitely seeing that we've let the game get too sloppy and the DM is a bit too inexperienced to really lay the law down without some help from good ol' fashioned table rules.

W3bDragon
2011-12-01, 02:38 AM
Here are some things your DM can do to move things along:

1. Any IC or OOC discussions must happen in front of the DM while he's paying attention, not while he's busy prepping or when you guys are out for a smoke. Also, anytime the PCs talk amongst each other, the DM intervenes with: "Is this IC? If so, talk accordingly. If not, we don't have time for OOC right now, the dragon is rearing its head, what do you guys do?"

2. During combat, the DM gives you about 3 minutes at the start of the fight to plan what to do. After that, no more talking, IC or OOC. Saying anything more than 2 words takes a move action, and can only be done on your turn. If the problem player (let's call him Bob) says something like: "Okay, do you guys think I should cast bless now? or go after the ogre?" The DM immediately responds: "Stop, you have no time to discuss this mid combat. Other PCs, you cannot respond. Bob, you got 10 seconds to decide."

3. This might or might not be a problem for you guys, but if it is, its a big one. The DM must be prepared to run a full session when he shows up. Its been my experience that DMs that allow the game to bog down with pointless OOC or IC discussions without stepping in to move things along are usually glad for the reprieve because they need time to think about the next encounter. If they are fully ready however, they'll be more than happy to continually move things along to get to the next event in their campaign. I know that I was personally guilty of that in some games I ran.

4. Beyond that, the DM could also separately talk to the problem player and say: "Hey Bob, your character is coming across as very hesitant. Is that a personality trait you have for him? It isn't you say? Then you need to show that he isn't hesitant. What? You say he's only hesitant because he wants to make sure the party does the right thing? Well do what you think is best and leave the rest to me. Do you really think I'd kill you guys for going to talk to the sheriff before the arcanist?"

Dingle
2011-12-01, 06:16 AM
I like all of W3bDragon's ideas, especially number 4, because it goes closest to the source of the problem.

"hesitant because he wants to make sure the party does the right thing" is a personality trait of so many of my charachters that PCs who haven't met them yet use it as an argument against him being the leader.

ILM
2011-12-01, 08:02 AM
My players are still new-ish so I haven't started enforcing no metagaming rules. I will soon, if only because some have already mentioned to me their annoyment at the 10-minute discussion of "what should I do?" and people basically playing other people's characters (with their consent, but still). I'm thinking of two ways, which I may both use.
- time limit: you have X seconds to decide your action in combat
- RAW limit: speaking in combat is a free action, which you can only take on your turn. You and/or your character can monologue all you want, but nobody's allowed to answer. Takes two for a conversation.

Provengreil
2011-12-01, 10:04 AM
As a DM, my response to this problem was rather simple: you don't have a hivemeind, and nobody cast telepathic bond recently. The enemy can hear you.

They stopped planning midcombat and discussing how best to torture the info out of guys they hadn't caught yet very fast.

As for other issues like the order in which to shop, I don't know what to say.

Choco
2011-12-01, 10:42 AM
Man, that got on my nerves something awful at first, but I have since learned to cope.

As a DM, I generally don't allow the players to plot anything if their characters are not in a position where they could do so, like in the middle of combat. However, I do make exceptions for simple tactical decisions like "hey, if you use <x> power to move me over here, then you can move there and we can flank". I realize that the player with the high INT score and tactical knowledge isn't always the character with said abilities, so basic suggestions like that I let go. Now when a player wants to spend 15 minutes IN COMBAT, with all of us separated on top of that, I put my foot down.

However, in a game I am playing in, that unfortunately isn't an option. Not only does the DM allow 2 other players to constantly do this, he himself often takes 5+ minutes taking HIS turn (most of this spent looking up the abilities of the monster we are fighting...). So, I just bring a handheld gaming system with me to our games...

Rorrik
2011-12-01, 11:00 AM
It takes the DM to push things along. I'll often have a wandering monster rush around a corner if the party is discussing and taking too long to decide on a course of action. "You're in a friggin' labyrinth full of angry beasts! Keep your voices down." It gets to the point they don't talk IC at all, if it can be helped. "I go right." "I follow him." Our combat has always been pretty fast paced too, I think it came down to
The enemy can hear you. and the demand for immediate decisions.

As a player, you can do like you've done and make the decision for your character without discussion, but there's not much you can do about his taking forever to decide.

Lictor of Thrax
2011-12-01, 04:47 PM
Man, that got on my nerves something awful at first, but I have since learned to cope.

As a DM, I generally don't allow the players to plot anything if their characters are not in a position where they could do so, like in the middle of combat. However, I do make exceptions for simple tactical decisions like "hey, if you use <x> power to move me over here, then you can move there and we can flank". I realize that the player with the high INT score and tactical knowledge isn't always the character with said abilities, so basic suggestions like that I let go. Now when a player wants to spend 15 minutes IN COMBAT, with all of us separated on top of that, I put my foot down.

However, in a game I am playing in, that unfortunately isn't an option. Not only does the DM allow 2 other players to constantly do this, he himself often takes 5+ minutes taking HIS turn (most of this spent looking up the abilities of the monster we are fighting...). So, I just bring a handheld gaming system with me to our games...

Last night was another test in patience. I've realized what's kill me here and it's this: The DM has spent years creating this world so even as we're playing, all sorts of stuff is happening around us that we might never know about. The player, he's the cleric, is approaching the game the way a completionist approaches a video game. He's trying to finish, every quest, fight every boss, get every item, leave no stone unturned. He's controlling a character, not playing one.

We had a five hour game session last night and all we accomplished was to sail into a cove, drop anchor, go to this locally famous bar and get drunk (my character managed to embarrass himself on the dance floor, as well).

The reason for this is that because the cleric had to spend tons and tons of time making sure every single thing was completely solved. He had to talk to every crew member to see if it would effect their morale if we didn't let them get shore leave (the DM had made it clear that they didn't really care). He had to get the full life story of every single person we bumped into at the bar (Oh, you're a fisherman? Have you heard any stories about great beasts in these waters? Have you noticed any strange ships etc...) and then, once he had milked every bit of information out of every random person we came across, he had to go and relay every single bit of it to our liaison back on the main island while pumping him for a complete briefing of what had happened since we left (12 game world hours ago). This is the only game I've ever played in where, I'm pretty sure, we've spent more time at the table than the characters have in the game world.

I've always found it rude for people to be playing with their phones or handhelds.. But that's because they were always the types who, no matter what was happening in the game and unless it was directly their combat turn, they were busy texting someone or snickering about some article they were reading. I think I might start doing stuff with my phone just so I don't fall asleep.

Anyhow, I'm going to lunch with our DM in a couple hours and I'm going to ha en a talk with him about pushing the pace a bit if there's nothing specific that he's trying to share and the third player and I are obviously starting to drift off. I know that he finds it cool that he gets to share this absurdly detailed world that he's created with us... But left to his own devices this cleric's player would be a senior citizen by the time his character was 20th level.

GungHo
2011-12-01, 04:54 PM
Last night was another test in patience. I've realized what's kill me here and it's this: The DM has spent years creating this world so even as we're playing, all sorts of stuff is happening around us that we might never know about. The player, he's the cleric, is approaching the game the way a completionist approaches a video game. He's trying to finish, every quest, fight every boss, get every item, leave no stone unturned. He's controlling a character, not playing one
Is this the first time this guy's ever really played a tabletop game? Maybe he just doesn't get it yet? Have you guys been direct with him and said, "hey, we know that this is the way you like to play, but that's not really how a tabletop game really works for us, and we don't really give out XP for getting all the achievements"?

Seharvepernfan
2011-12-01, 05:31 PM
Time limits. Once its your turn, you have 10 seconds to decide what to do. Also, the pcs can't relay information to each other that their characters couldn't in that round.

navar100
2011-12-01, 07:51 PM
As a DM, my response to this problem was rather simple: you don't have a hivemeind, and nobody cast telepathic bond recently. The enemy can hear you.

They stopped planning midcombat and discussing how best to torture the info out of guys they hadn't caught yet very fast.

As for other issues like the order in which to shop, I don't know what to say.

The problem is the bad guys are a hive mind. All of the bad guys are run by one person, you the DM. You coordinate all their tactics. You do it before the game is even played when you design the encounter. You do it as the combat happens adapting to circumstances. You even know what the players' characters are capable of to allow you to create encounters where their abilities will shine or can't be used at all for an "interesting challenge". You even know how many opponents (the party) the bad guys will face.

Players rarely get to plan out a combat beforehand. They don't know the bad guys' lair. They don't set up ambushes. They don't know what the bad guys can do. DMs infamously complain of players using metagame knowledge of monster manual statistics. Players have to make knowledge checks at least. Players don't know how many bad guys they are facing until the combat actually happens. Players can't read minds of other players. They don't auto-know what someone else will do. Players needs to be able to talk to each other to coordinate. If they don't, then they aren't a party. They are instead individuals who just happen to be attacking the same bad guys and not each other.

There is a point to the OP's problem of over analyzing, but to deny any communication at all is not fair play.

Randomatic
2011-12-01, 08:19 PM
The problem is the bad guys are a hive mind. All of the bad guys are run by one person, you the DM. You coordinate all their tactics. You do it before the game is even played when you design the encounter. You do it as the combat happens adapting to circumstances. You even know what the players' characters are capable of to allow you to create encounters where their abilities will shine or can't be used at all for an "interesting challenge". You even know how many opponents (the party) the bad guys will face.

Players rarely get to plan out a combat beforehand. They don't know the bad guys' lair. They don't set up ambushes. They don't know what the bad guys can do. DMs infamously complain of players using metagame knowledge of monster manual statistics. Players have to make knowledge checks at least. Players don't know how many bad guys they are facing until the combat actually happens. Players can't read minds of other players. They don't auto-know what someone else will do. Players needs to be able to talk to each other to coordinate. If they don't, then they aren't a party. They are instead individuals who just happen to be attacking the same bad guys and not each other.

There is a point to the OP's problem of over analyzing, but to deny any communication at all is not fair play.

There is also the issue that there are many boring moments that the game skips over, but involves the characters spending large amounts of time together. The characters travel together, camp together, eat together, etc. but the conversations that they have during most of those times aren't played out. Although many PC's, being the super secretive loner types, might not get to know each other very well in all that time, any character that isn't a stand in for the Punisher is going to know his travelling companions very well.

Characters would have a knowledge of the personalities of their companions, as well as the capabilities of their companions more extensive than what the players would usually realize. So some degree of OOC talking can be helpful to establish those facts. The player of the mage asking the fighter to not charge into a group of enemies because he's about to cast a spell there can make sense, seeing as the fighter probably knows the mage well enough to guess what he would do when a combat starts.

TheThan
2011-12-01, 09:08 PM
I don't mind people forming strategy and playing smart. But I refuse to sit through 20 minutes of deliberation during the players turn. it happens to me when I run decent: journey into the darkness. So I've invited the "kitchen timer" round.

take a kitchen timer, and set it for a predetermined amount of time (say 3-5 minutes for a dnd round). All players must take (or at least declare) their action(s) within that time frame or they forfeit their turn.

nedz
2011-12-02, 03:51 PM
Its a DMing skill really - usually called pacing. Some times you want to let them plan everything out, but other times you just need to push on.
In terms of this problem:
In combat:
If its that players turn you say "So your spending your actions discussing things" and you immediately call the next characters initiative. Usually you don't need to enforce this too harshly, ie if they immediately state what they are doing and do it fine, if they carry on though: then its "Hesitation, next"
Out of combat:
Throw in a random encounter: just call initiatives and plunge in. Rinse and repeat.

There is a sense that ideally: you want the players to anticipate what they are going to do, do it, and then recall it later. However that doesn't seem to be happening here.

John Campbell
2011-12-02, 09:31 PM
I've had DMs who houserule an IC speech limit of six words per combat round. This actually isn't a rule I personally agree with, but it's certainly an idea that could help with your issue.

Our DM uses that same rule. I find it's a bad idea, counterproductive, and slows things down more than it helps, because instead of just blurting out quick bits of IC chatter, people stop and count on their fingers to try to figure out how to phrase what they need to say within the draconian and inflexible word limit. It also tends to push talking from IC to OOC, where there's no word limit.

Heatwizard
2011-12-03, 03:37 AM
For the wandering-around-talking-to-people bit, maybe tell him that any plot hooks that don't get bitten will probably just get recycled in some other town, or such? Doesn't even matter if it's not true.

Jay R
2011-12-03, 10:09 AM
When I try and bring these things up he points out that he's just trying to do what's best and help out the party as much as possible...

"Yup - that's the problem all right. You're trying to help the party as much as possible. The rest of us are trying to help the party a reasonable amount within the constraints of simulating a fantasy experience and without bogging down the game. It's all right if the party makes some mistakes along the way.

"Please stop trying to help the party as much as possible and start trying to help the party a reasonable amount in a fairly efficient way."

Kurald Galain
2011-12-03, 08:26 PM
This. Enforce a timer and say, "If you dont decide what to do before the timer goes off, you lose your turn that round."

I actually do this.

Well, the fun thing is, once I state that thinking too much will cause you to lose your turn, players change their behavior enough so that nobody ever actually has lost a turn. So that works out pretty well.

I also enforce no lengthy debates during combat, and point out that anything you say in combat will be overheard by your opponents (assuming they speak your language, of course).

denthor
2011-12-03, 08:35 PM
Your friend is a classic detail person. If the rest of you agree remind him that in game time decision of life and death caliber take 6 seconds.

Get a minute timer hour glass some sort of minute minder and say we have this long when the time is up decision time. If he still wants to weigh options leave his character there standing and interact with DM.

In other words make your decision and move forward.

See above I was scooped!!!

RandomNPC
2011-12-03, 09:16 PM
I'm stealing the timer Idea, hopefully I don't have to use it.

I didn't notice until someone said it here, but I use "The bad guy just heard that" and change tactics mid-battle if the group keeps calling out for specific actions. When they plan things out before hand I keep combat the way it was originally planned, sometimes they fail horribly and sometimes the plan comes together perfectly.

As far as the character who has to explore every nook and cranny and interrogate every npc, have them roll a gather info check and a d4. Tell them for the next 1d4+1 hours they're looking for the info they want, you'll get back to them after that much in game time goes by. A few afternoons spent just for the DM to say "Nothing plot relevant happens" should get a clue across.

navar100
2011-12-03, 10:34 PM
I'm stealing the timer Idea, hopefully I don't have to use it.

I didn't notice until someone said it here, but I use "The bad guy just heard that" and change tactics mid-battle if the group keeps calling out for specific actions. When they plan things out before hand I keep combat the way it was originally planned, sometimes they fail horribly and sometimes the plan comes together perfectly.

As far as the character who has to explore every nook and cranny and interrogate every npc, have them roll a gather info check and a d4. Tell them for the next 1d4+1 hours they're looking for the info they want, you'll get back to them after that much in game time goes by. A few afternoons spent just for the DM to say "Nothing plot relevant happens" should get a clue across.

I'll repeat you are not being fair to the players. The bad guys don't call out to each other because they don't need to. They have all their tactics thought out by you in your head, even adapting to circumstances as the combat is happening. Players cannot read each others' minds. They have to call out to each other to adapt their tactics as the combat is happening. You are taking away their ability to adapt to combat circumstances, which contributes a lot as to why their plans might be failing.

Dimers
2011-12-03, 10:42 PM
remind him that in game time decision of life and death caliber take 6 seconds.

Another appropriate reminder: We're acting the parts of characters in a game, and no real person is going to suffer if you do miss something or make a bad tactical choice.

(Heck, we might have more fun if you miss something or make a bad tactical choice.)

(And we'll certainly have more fun right now if you hurry up and let the rest of us get on with the game.)

Seatbelt
2011-12-03, 11:10 PM
Seems like the problem is as much out-of-combat stuff as it is in-combat stuff. He spends the entire session talking to people. Now granted it's been a while since I've played D&D but our last game was in a city and it was more or less a sandbox game. When we started doing role-playing stuff (the party is in a tavern trying to case the joint for information) the DM would rotate who the spotlight was on, so every 5 or 10 minutes he'd ask if anyone else had anything they wanted to do. This was especially the case if players A and C were doing all the talking but B was being quiet. It gave B a chance to jump in if new information presented itself.

We also developed a "hand-wave" technique. Because we could only game once every two weeks and gaming time was precious, if we started pursuing a line of questions/an NPC/whatever that wasn't actually meaningful the DM would say something like "you guys spend some time talking to the fisherman and he tells you this crazy legend about a giant fish before wandering off." He gave us a bit of a chance to roleplay with some NPCs and then wrapped it up so we didn't get bogged down in "pointless" roleplay.

I know a lot of players might not like that particular style, but it helped to keep the game moving. We were trying to set up a mob-like organization for our shadow syndicate in a new city. so there were no "adventure hooks" like in a normal game. We basically created our own adventures in the DM's sandbox each game, and that handwave technique kept us from wandering aimlessly talking to random NPCs and helped keep us focused on the task at hand. It might be helpful to this new player to get some kind of direct verbal cue from the DM or the other players that *this line of action doesn't lead to any action*

Rosstin
2011-12-03, 11:16 PM
I really dig the handwave idea.

By contrast, my current game entails a lot of micromanagement. We don't deal with any campfires, but we do roleplay every purchase. On the one hand, it's extremely immersive. On the other hand, sometimes I just want to say I buy 7 potions and get to talking to someone important. It's tricky, there are ups and downs to my DM's immersive style.

If you have a very clear goal and you're dealing with repeat actions, I think handwaving is a good way to move things along.

Jornophelanthas
2011-12-04, 07:32 AM
Some of the above posts give advice to the OP as if he were the DM. However, Lictor of Thrax has stated in his posts that he is, in fact, not the DM, but a fellow player of the player with the "issue".

While a large part of working towards a solution lies with the DM, I would also suggest giving Lictor of Thrax advice on how to approach the DM with this issue.

(Personally, I have little advice of my own to offer that has not already been said, except this: POINT YOUR DM TOWARDS READING THIS THREAD.)

nedz
2011-12-04, 07:48 AM
Some of the above posts give advice to the OP as if he were the DM. However, Lictor of Thrax has stated in his posts that he is, in fact, not the DM, but a fellow player of the player with the "issue".

While a large part of working towards a solution lies with the DM, I would also suggest giving Lictor of Thrax advice on how to approach the DM with this issue.

(Personally, I have little advice of my own to offer that has not already been said, except this: POINT YOUR DM TOWARDS READING THIS THREAD.)
+1 to this, it is a DMing issue. That said peer pressure from the players can help. Print out this thread and gove him a hardcopy :smallsmile:
Alternatively take these points and prompt them during the game yourself.


I'll repeat you are not being fair to the players. The bad guys don't call out to each other because they don't need to. They have all their tactics thought out by you in your head, even adapting to circumstances as the combat is happening. Players cannot read each others' minds. They have to call out to each other to adapt their tactics as the combat is happening. You are taking away their ability to adapt to combat circumstances, which contributes a lot as to why their plans might be failing.

It might be fun if the DM did this - just once, to make the point. Bonuses if he really dragged it out :smallbiggrin:

You could point out to your friend that he has plenty of time to work out what he's going to do. He has the time during everyone elses goes to think about what his actions will be. You could also point out that the turn lasts 6 seconds.

Trog
2011-12-04, 03:27 PM
Talk to the guy about it directly. No extra rules at the table you have to enforce just to get him to stop, none of that.

Just go "Look (insert guy's name here) I love you to death and I like gaming with you but you *need* to speed up your game in *all* respects. I think if you do it it will help the group get to more adventuring/more combats/faster leveling up. We all want to move faster. What would help is
- Pick your own spells without help from the group and before we head into combat
- For little decisions just call for a quick consensus vote.
- Limit planning - I won't screw over the group if you all just talk for a minute then rush in headlong if it will help us move things along."

If he gets hurt feelings about it and tries to not do it then repeat the process again and say that you're still looking to speed things up more. If he can't change and is ruining everyone else's fun then game without him.

Kymme
2011-12-06, 10:36 PM
I may be a little slow to the draw, but.....
BY GODS!!!! YOU'RE USING THE STORMWRACK SAMPLE ADVENTURE!!!!:smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:
Just had to say it:smallredface:
Although, to be helpful, maybe you could just talk to this guy face to face, and tell him that if he keeps trying to strategise in the middle of a heated combat, you'll just start ignoring him entirely.
Just a thought :smallredface: