Player discrepancy

[S_Grey]

All of us that have DMed before have probably encountered it, been frustrated by it, and felt bad about it. Players making characters in different levels of optimization is one thing, but when some players just happen to be smarter than their party members, a whole different issue is created.

When I DM I like to be as fair as possible, while still making sure everyone has fun. Unfortunately these two things typically happen to oppose each other in the games I run. I have some players that brilliantly fly through scenarios with the foresight and grace of a dove wearing a combined +6 charisma / +6 dexterity little bird cape, but I also have others that are less inclined to competence.

I try my hardest to make everyone feel they are something special and are contributing to the experience, but sometimes (often :smallfrown:) they end up discouraged because of this.

How do you handle problems like this?

[ScrambledBrains]

This is...coming from a guy who's a complete and total schmoe(not to mention I haven't DM-ed since the last group I tried it for made me hate it.), but...maybe before worrying about your players who aren't as competent, you should first inquire as to if they're having fun with their characters and don't feel the need to always be competent?

It's always possible no problem exists to begin with, and your players may only resent you trying to bump them up if they're content where they are.

Of course, this assumes that the ones who aren't as competent aren't dragging down the fun of the ones who are. In that case...well, discuss the issue with all of them in some fashion OOC, and then see what happens.

As always, communication might help solve your problems. :smallsmile:

Disclaimer: The above written by someone who's never DM-ed long term and whose total DnD experience is nowhere near as long as some other posters. Therefore, take with grain of salt. :smallsmile::smallbiggrin:

[ngilop]

for both as a player and as a DM its is much more important for a PC to be competant at what they are desgined to do than be alwasy competant in every situation.

case in my point. playing 3rd ed for the first time as a fighter..

the druid's wolf was better at combat that I was and by wildshape.. yeah I cried..

I didn't care if my fighter was not the best in social settings, or if he could not figure out teh complex riddle.. but dman.. seeing teh dman animal companion eb better than my character at what my class is named after (FIGHTer) really put a damper on my like of 3rd ed, and it took me a couple of years ot ever want to start 3rd ed again.

[Captnq]

At the end of every session ask: Any problems, comments, questions, concerns? No? Screw 'em if they can't ask for help.

Also, kill them. Kill the weak. Focus on them and attack without mercy. Don't cheat, just try to kill them. When they die, they may learn for their mistakes and make a better PC next time.

[nedz]

Player > Build > Class

Now balancing Classes and Builds is hard enough in 3.5 though we do have the Tier system which helps with this, though less so with the OP level of the various builds.

Balancing Player ability is beyond your remit as DM

There are certain things you could try:

Designing encounters which teach lessons about the game
You have to be careful with this as you can get it wrong quite easily and if you do it too often then it gets old very quickly.

Designing encounters which play to the strengths of the weaker players, or at least don't play to the strength of the stronger players
This is a minefield which can leave you with everyone annoyed with you as the stronger players don't feel challenged and the weaker players feel patronised.

Designing encounters with multiple solutions
Bit of a crap shoot at least insofar as solving your problem. It's a good approach in general though.

Discussing Encounters OOC afterwards
This can work, ideally you will do this outside of the session.

Do nothing
If your weaker players simply lack experience then this is the correct solution.

Really though you should try a mix of these approaches and see what you learn about the situation.

[Brookshw]

At the end of every session ask: Any problems, comments, questions, concerns? No? Screw 'em if they can't ask for help.

Also, kill them. Kill the weak. Focus on them and attack without mercy. Don't cheat, just try to kill them. When they die, they may learn for their mistakes and make a better PC next time.

Oh dear lord,......

Maybe, maybe, but probably not. Depends on the player but this can and does lead to players leaving the table.

Talk to them, figure out what they want from the game and look for ways to compromise on the overall groups desires for the campaign. But a disenfranchised player is probably not sticking around, and why are you playing with someone you wouldn't want to stick around? Work with them, help plan things to them so they feel valued.

[ArcturusV]

Well, it sounds like you're not talking about optimization/power issues with the character so much, as the nature of the players themselves and their abilities for lateral thinking and deductive reasoning, etc.

The funny thing is, as a DM I don't typically have a problem with it. It's come up in a few campaigns I've run. But DnD at it's nature is a cooperative game. The trick isn't so much as trying to prevent the more analytical/clever gamer from coming up with solutions so he doesn't overshadow the other players at the table, but making sure that whatever solution he does come up with can't be acted upon by themselves. I found that most players don't mind if one guy is "The Strategist" and always coming up with the plans, so long as they have a part in that plan. If they're not including others in their plan, then you should probably have a discrete chat saying, "Hey, I love what you're doing, but remember it's a team game and next time you plan your daring escape from the Tower of Doom, just... try to give the barbarian something to do, even if it's just as simple as spiking doors behind you or climbing up a wall to lower a rope for you, etc."

[Spore]

Designing encounters which teach lessons about the game
You have to be careful with this as you can get it wrong quite easily and if you do it too often then it gets old very quickly.

Yes. Players will feel insulted. Kill them or skip the "gaming lesson". Seriously, I HATE this. Either you kill me because I made a mistake or you don't rub it in. I can analyze the mistake by myself, thank you very much.

[Urpriest]

Yes. Players will feel insulted. Kill them or skip the "gaming lesson". Seriously, I HATE this. Either you kill me because I made a mistake or you don't rub it in. I can analyze the mistake by myself, thank you very much.

If it's actually teaching a lesson, it would be something you didn't know, so you can't exactly analyze it by yourself.

Granted, I don't know exactly what nedz meant, but I imagined it was something like "My players don't know the rules for grappling, so I'm going to throw a series of monsters at them that use progressively more complicated grappling abilities" or "My players don't know about ToB, I'm going to start sprinkling in some ToB NPCs"

[nedz]

Yes. Players will feel insulted. Kill them or skip the "gaming lesson". Seriously, I HATE this. Either you kill me because I made a mistake or you don't rub it in. I can analyze the mistake by myself, thank you very much.
Obviously someone has done this to you badly, which, as I said, is quite easy.

If it's actually teaching a lesson, it would be something you didn't know, so you can't exactly analyze it by yourself.

Granted, I don't know exactly what nedz meant, but I imagined it was something like "My players don't know the rules for grappling, so I'm going to throw a series of monsters at them that use progressively more complicated grappling abilities" or "My players don't know about ToB, I'm going to start sprinkling in some ToB NPCs"
Yes, new parts of the rules, new tactics, new tricks, new spells, etc.

And Show don't tell.

[Maginomicon]

Well, one thing you could do is implement passive intelligence (puzzle hints) and passive wisdom (common sense and campaign memory) have the smart players roleplay dumb characters and vice versa. The trick is to make sure that you only give the hints to those that in-character should get them, and let the smart players try to figure it out based on what the other players interpret of your hints.

[Spore]

If it's actually teaching a lesson, it would be something you didn't know, so you can't exactly analyze it by yourself.

Not to sound snooty but I am 26. I can take a bit of direct information and do not require a schooling encounter. This is not World of Warcraft, this is Pen and Paper, where it takes several minutes to play out a few ingame seconds. Explain the problem and don't let my character jump through hoops.

But what I mainly dislike about things like that is the change in pace. My DM forced several very high CR traps on to my rogue, then after a level up I invested heavily into Disable Device and Perception and suddenly traps vanished from the game for half a year. Get some consistency going, will ya?

How are you supposed to adapt and prepare when every other dungeon throws inexplicable stuff at you? Some players like to be spontaneous, other like consistency. I am surely the latter one. I lack creativity and I openly admit it. I can take being unprepared because it increases the danger. But you can't make every encounter unpredictable. That's like giving every pupil a golden star sticker and telling them they're special. If everything is special, nothing is.

[nedz]

Not to sound snooty but I am 26. I can take a bit of direct information and do not require a schooling encounter. This is not World of Warcraft, this is Pen and Paper, where it takes several minutes to play out a few ingame seconds. Explain the problem and don't let my character jump through hoops.
You're probably not a good candidate for this approach. On the other hand I have found that it can be hard to tell some people anything, you have to show them.

But what I mainly dislike about things like that is the change in pace. My DM forced several very high CR traps on to my rogue, then after a level up I invested heavily into Disable Device and Perception and suddenly traps vanished from the game for half a year. Get some consistency going, will ya?

How are you supposed to adapt and prepare when every other dungeon throws inexplicable stuff at you? Some players like to be spontaneous, other like consistency. I am surely the latter one. I lack creativity and I openly admit it. I can take being unprepared because it increases the danger. But you can't make every encounter unpredictable. That's like giving every pupil a golden star sticker and telling them they're special. If everything is special, nothing is.
You would hate my games :smallsmile:

I run a variety of encounters to allow everyone a chance to contribute, there is normally a running theme though.

[Pickford]

ngilop:
the druid's wolf was better at combat that I was and by wildshape.. yeah I cried..

This does not compute.

Wolf companion at 1st: +3 to hit (1d6 + 1)
Fighter at 1st: +6 to hit (2d6 + 4)/+2 ranged (1d4+4, with a sling the Fighter would average more damage per hit than a Wolf can do maximum!)

Did I mention the Fighter can easily trip better? (Combat Expertise + Improved Trip...voila, the Fighter trips at +8, the Wolf at +2. On top of this, the Fighter gets a free attack after the trip)

Ok, let's look at 2nd level:

Wolf: no change
Fighter: +7 to hit/+3 ranged, ok the Fighter has an extra 5% hit chance. There's a non-zero chance he has MW weapons now, so that's probably 10% extra. (+8 melee/+4 ranged)

Hint: This gets more lopsided in favor of the Fighter as levels go up.


Here's the thing, some classes are easier to screw up than others and actually require more thought to not make a mess out of. Most classes have defined and largely unchangable abilities/features.

Fighters? You pick your own. And it's entirely possible for someone to pick several feats that simply do not compliment the Fighter's chosen style of combat, leading to a meltdown of character concept.

S_Grey: Could you give a specific example where a player has been discouraged in one of your games? Different classes will have somewhat different answers, but in my experience it's often been a case of a character attempting to use the wrong tool for the job at hand. (i.e. Attempting to trip an extremely stable creature that has high str or dex).

[AzureKnight]

For what reason are the players that are on the low end of things having problems with? Is it lack of experience, short attention span, inability to catch the clues that you give? Severalcould be the main issue.

When I had issues with players in the past, I told them that their next mission would be very in depth with key information they would need to gather. I supplied each with a notebook to take notes with. The difference in the next three game sessions was staggering. The players whom seemed to be a bit on the slow side referanced notes and really upped their game.

[Anxe]

When my players had this problem I moved the more creative thinking problems out of the gaming sessions and into emails. I've also done that for the more "Actor" stereotype players. Give that a try? That lesson idea wouldn't work with my players, but I suppose you could try it as well.