Group dynamics, and that one frustrating player...

[tribalxgecko]

I have a current game group that has been together for about 6 months. The players play well together, get along great, and the game has been a lot of fun. They just reached level 6 and are really starting to look at the options ahead of them for their PC's. Currently I have a Barbarian / Ranger, Rogue, Psionic Warrior, and a Wizard (Necromancer). The player running the Necromancer is Chaotic Neutral, which I am fine with, and he has done a good job. But he wants to have the character become a bit more twisted / corrupt / evil over time, as a 'side effect' of the darker magics. He likes to animate dead and create zombies and have them as his body guards and such. Again, this is fine, and we all have had a lot of fun with this and the encounters it has drummed up. Here's the thing though, he is getting to the point, where he has no interest in being the 'good guy' or helping out with the world around him. When people come asking for help, or the group witnesses something, or I toss in any other plot thread to spin off into an adventure, he really has no interest. All he wants to do is gain power, get more spells, create more undead, and untimately turn evil and take over the world. High ambitions, I know (although, if he does take that route I think it would be a lot of fun for his PC to be the BBEG in the next campaign!).

So, I am looking for some ideas on what I can do to get him, and his PC for that matter, to actually start doing stuff again. The Psionic Warrior is your typical adventurer and just wants to go dungeon delving, kill stuff, and find treasure. The Rogue is big into roleplaying stuff, and he has made it his personal vendetta to eliminate an assassin's guild within the city. The barbarian / ranger is content either way is the general good guy helping out the lesser folk. So they are all easy to toss things at and get them going. But the Necro has no interest, and they have sorta nominated him as the de facto 'leader' of the group.

The player himself is a really good guy, and is having a lot of fun. Thus far everyone else has as well. But, they are finishing up a small adventure (which the necro led them onto), and everything I have thrown at them, he has disregarded. And he is a sales person, and has that charm and personality that gets the other 3 players to agree that this or that is not worth worrying about. I think, unintentionally, he has sort railroaded the group in his goal of doing what his PC wants. If you get my drift.

I guess I have never dealt with this before, so I am at a bit of a loss what to do. I can't really tell if it is so much the player trying to take control, or the player playing his PC (and unintentionally causing this). Or maybe I am doing something wrong. This is only my second outing as a DM. As I said, everyone is having a great time right now, but the current adventure will probably end with this weeks session, and the necro has refused to follow up on anything else, he basically wants to go to the temple / church of his goddess and see what he can learn from them or what he can find to give him more power. While the other 3 really don't have much interest in this, but will prolly do so cause he talks them into it. There is an overacrcing plot of a cult who is trying to raise a dracolich into godhood, so I am thinking of maybe using that somehow. But I tried hinting that the temple of his goddess was taken over, and he just shrugged. If I could find a way to get this player interested in what is happening with the world around him, then it would be easier, but he isn't. He thought the idea of the cult taking over and killing people was great, because it would give him a lot of dead bodies and undead fodder to use. And as long as it is not his life that is lost, then he really don't care.

Sorry this is long, just a bit frustrated and unsure of what to do at this point. Any feedback or thoughts would be great.

[BowStreetRunner]

Have you talked to him? Seriously, this is the first mistake many new DMs make. They fail to discuss these issues with the players. Let him know that being DM isn't easy and you could use a little help from him.

Explain what range of campaign type you are comfortable with, and if running a 'villain' campaign isn't in the mix, make that clear to him. Ask him what kinds of things would motivate his character in the direction you want. He built the character after all. He should know best how to push the Necromancer's buttons.

If he is not willing to help you, then you have a serious problem and should probably find a different party/DM combination.

[ZamielVanWeber]

The ritual rules from Unearthed Arcana are great for making flavorful spells and dropping them around the world. Quest lines could involve him trying to get at these things.

Option B is just explaining to the player that he is derailing everything by ignoring ALL your adventure hooks and you would appreciate if it he worked to go on a couple.

[tribalxgecko]

I have brought it up a couple times, and he kinda shrugs it off. He said that his character would be interested in finding artifacts or relics. Maybe making pacts with demons. He also said he just wants XP, so he can reach his goal as a player to become evil. Granted, these are ideas, but I can't work off them that well. The others are all mostly good guys, and have no care to make pacts with or seek out demons. And the artifacts and relics are a bit more powerful than what this level is ready for. Maybe breaking an artifact down into pieces, kinda cliche, but might work...

[AmberVael]

I have brought it up a couple times, and he kinda shrugs it off. He said that his character would be interested in finding artifacts or relics. Maybe making pacts with demons. He also said he just wants XP, so he can reach his goal as a player to become evil. Granted, these are ideas, but I can't work off them that well. The others are all mostly good guys, and have no care to make pacts with or seek out demons. And the artifacts and relics are a bit more powerful than what this level is ready for. Maybe breaking an artifact down into pieces, kinda cliche, but might work...

Some ideas for you!

Yes, handing out true Artifacts at this point is a bad idea- but what about more storied and important (if not as powerful) magic items? Or rare prizes that, while perhaps not mighty in their own right, might lead to something greater? Bits of forbidden lore that would (with work) offer some greater power down the line, or perhaps a quest that could give hints as to where a lost artifact might be, or a key to finding it, or a method to access it that others wouldn't have? How about he does find an artifact, but its powers have gone dormant over the years and needs to be reawakened- with each step he takes, its powers grow stronger. Rather than making it one quest, make it a questline which can give the player a feeling of progress without handing over something you're not ready to give yet.

As for the demon pacts- if he is the kind of player you describe him as, with the kind of character you explain, why not encourage him to do it anyway, but explain it away? I personally had an evil character in a similar party, and it was exceptionally fun to have her explain away her deeds. Heck, I got good enough at it to where I had the other players rethinking it, let alone their characters. My favorite was when they angrily confronted her over summoning demons. She asked if they would rather her steal angels away from important duties than repurpose fiends as a force for good. A little conflict and debate between characters keeps things interesting so long as it doesn't become a full blown brawl.

[Particle_Man]

Tell him he becomes an NPC who gets his wish, makes a pact with some evil god or fiend, and becomes evil. Tell him to make a new character, compatible with the party, that now has to deal with this new NPC villains.

[Raven777]

Tell him he becomes an NPC who gets his wish, makes a pact with some evil god or fiend, and becomes evil. Tell him to make a new character, compatible with the party, that now has to deal with this new NPC villains.

No. Never rob a player of his character. The entire point of D&D's escapism is letting you be anything you want. The DM provides the stage but the characters belong to the players.

Right now, that player is a pretty lucky bastard. His party is fine with necromancy. He doesn't have to bicker with a Cleric or a Paladin feeling entitled to play the party's thought police. Maybe the rest of the group just needs to be a bit more proactive in choosing the party's next direction rather than always rely on an apathetic Wizard for leadership?

[Z3ro]

This seems pretty easy to me; give him a nemisis. Dangle a quest to find some powerful magic item, only to discover that someone else has gotten there first and pre-stolen the item. Have them taunt the player, then dangle the quest for revenge. In my experience, players interested in evil/their own characters over the campaign tend to go overboard when they feel their character's been slighted. Give him a target for revenge and watch the self-motivation!

[tribalxgecko]

I will work in some of the suggestions here. I did give him a call and went over some options and got some feedback on what would motivate his character. He is still sticking with the "I want to take over the world with my undead" thing. Which, on one had I think is a cool idea, on the other could be an utter disaster. So I will take that a step at a time. I told him something of that caliber would not happer until he was much much higher level, and that won't be for a good year or so with the pace of our campaign. So I got him to sorta set that on the backburner. But her still wants to find artifacts and such that will get him on that path.

Z3re: I had the same idea as well, but his comment to that was that he would let them take over the world and do all the hard work for him, then he would walk in and take his nemesis' place. So I kinda made the idea moot, as if his nemesis takes over and creates a necropolis like the player wants, in kinda fudges up the rest of the campaign. I mean, I could go with it, but the PC's wanted a more adventurous political sort of game, not an undead based game, which the other 3 didn't have a whole lot of interest in.

When talking with him, he kinda agrees with my ideas and outlook, until the time comes and we are playing, then not so much. I will try the suggestions here first, see how that goes.

I did get him really interested in the idea of becoming a Lich (since it fills that undead king / commander roll). So I was thinking of maybe making some sort of idea that there is only 1 true lich (maybe an artifact or something that turns a person into a lich). And if he wants to become a lich, he needs to take out the current one. That would give him a purpose. Especaially if I make the current lich the head of one of their enemy group / guilds...A thought anyway.

[weckar]

If he wants to gain more power, make that his quest. Drop hints he may take the place of the Dracolich in whatever godhood ritual will happen.

[Sam K]

If a necromancer hungry for power cant find an excuse to go on adventures, the world is in bad shape indeed.

It should be pretty simple really: he wants dark power. But he's not powerful enough to just make the world bow down to him just yet. So, by hanging out with the goody goody guys on their silly quests, he's actually achieving his goals:

He earns experience and aquires wealth.

He gets a sanctioned, completely legal way to test whatever horrible spell he can come up with next. Familicide? Try it on the orc chieftan. Edwards spiky tentacles of forced intrusion? Toss it on the bad guys. If he did that stuff in most towns, he would be burned as a witch, but if he does it while adventuring SOCIETY WILL CHEER HIM ON! People will PAY him to conduct experiments in genocide as long as it's on the "evil races".

Adventuring provides a constant supply of dead bodies and tends to bring you in contact with all kinds of interesting undead.

If he cant work with that, he's just not trying.

[Particle_Man]

No. Never rob a player of his character. The entire point of D&D's escapism is letting you be anything you want. The DM provides the stage but the characters belong to the players.

Unless, of course, that is not the game that the other PCs want to play or that the DM wants to run. Then you can either a) stop the entire campaign, because it is not the game you want to run, or b) continue the campaign but npc one character, so that the DM can run the game he wants to run and the other players can play the game they want to play, or c) resign yourself to running a campaign you don't want to run, and have the other players resign themselves to playing a game they don't want to play, because apparently only one player's wishes matter and no one else's.

[tribalxgecko]

If he wants to gain more power, make that his quest. Drop hints he may take the place of the Dracolich in whatever godhood ritual will happen.

That is basically what I have done. Which is also the problem. It is a "I am going to go --insert quest here-- now, so I can get powerful, or else nothing. Or so that seems to be my consensus. The only thing he has any interest of doing right now is going to the temple of his goddess to learn more about being a necro and gaining power. Even though I have stated that the church has been under attack and hinted that it is over run with cultists (who have been popping in and out). In which his only comment then was that he would go take over the church then and be their master. All good and fine I suppose, but the other 3 players really could care less about going to the temple, since it has absolutely nothing to do with anything going on. It is just the player wanting to go there. I can play along with it, yes, but to the annoyance of others.

[weckar]

In most campaigns, it is almost inevitable that one character becomes the unofficial 'lead character'. If the other players are more lenient on adventures, it seems you'll have to weave in their stories into his.

[tribalxgecko]

If a necromancer hungry for power cant find an excuse to go on adventures, the world is in bad shape indeed.

It should be pretty simple really: he wants dark power. But he's not powerful enough to just make the world bow down to him just yet. So, by hanging out with the goody goody guys on their silly quests, he's actually achieving his goals:

....

If he cant work with that, he's just not trying.

Exactly my point. I have given him new spell scrolls, a 'curiously carved' staff, and some golden disks with strange ruins. They sit there without an ounce of his interest. I have spoken of another mage creating zombies that the player could not command or use his other undead based spells on. He never followed up on that. I introduced a cult that is slowly taking over other churches and gaining power so that they may raise their leader to godhood...again, no interest. He said it does not concern his character, because he just wants dead bodies so he can make more zombies... even though he is limited in what he can even command anyway. Not sure if he gets it or not. In the current adventure, which he set out on and basically talked the others into, he has pretty much complained the entire time since it did not have what he wanted. They are investigating an old wizards tower that a merchant hired them to do. That is where I put the staff, scrolls, and disks. But he got those 3 sessions ago, has returned to their home town, stashed stuff away, then decided to go back cause he did not find anything he needed. So they will be returning, again, back home from the tower. With him upset because he did not gain power. I notice, as I write this, it is like a power gamer who does not want to do anything to gain power...if that makes sense.

[Azoth]

If we go with causing him (the character) to feel spited, it is time to drop some wandering groups of lawful stupid clerics/paladins his way. Dangle a quest for the long lost tome/wand/ring/ect of an ancient and powerful necromancer in front of him. He should bite pretty easily. While off hunting for it, let the group encounter this church group sent to destroy it so no one can use it. The trick here is to make them strong enough to drive off the party without killing them (if your players embrace the tactical decision of retreating that is). Should instantly set him on the path to get stronger to deal with this annoyance.

Occassionally hide a necromancer in your other plot hooks. Drop one for a town with a suspected lycanthrope propblem. Every full moon several bodies are found half eaten and mutilated, so the townsfolk think they are being attacked by werewolves. In reality a necromancer is loosing a pack of skeletal dire wolves on the town to act as a distraction for him harvesting bodies from the graveyard/conducting an evil pagan ritual/holding his monthly evil bridge game. He wants to learn more spells and become more powerful, what better way than to take control of enemy undead or take a slain necromancer's spell book.

When the party fights enemy groups, hide hints and clues written in cryptic glyphs talking about research locations for a very powerful ritual/spell/item. Be vague about what it is, but give enough of a desription to get him interested even if false. Trail him and the party along for what could be a wild goose chase as far as his desires are concerned, but could be the key to saving the world as far as the party is concerned.

[weckar]

Seems to me he doesn't know power when he sees it and only sees power in sheer numbers.

What's this character's WIS score, out of curiosity?

[Haldir]

If you can't tie his church being overrun by cultists into the main plot of the game, then you're not trying hard enough, friend.

[Muenster Man]

It seems that your player is falling into the trap the Rich outlined in one of his gaming articles (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307KmEm4H9k6efFP.html):

"Try to never just say, "My character isn't interested in that adventure." A lot of people mistake this for good roleplaying, because you are asserting your character's personality. Wrong. Good roleplaying should never bring the game to a screeching halt. One of your jobs as a player is to come up with a reason why your character would be interested in a plot. After all, your personality is entirely in your hands, not the DM's. Come up with a reason why the adventure (or the reward) might appeal to you, no matter how esoteric or roundabout the reasoning."

You've tried your best to accommodate the player's wishes by throwing out a lot of really useful means by which that player could become much more powerful. If the character (player?) just wants more zombies and xp but nothing else, then maybe you should talk to the player and say: "This isn't working. The story isn't advancing. I've tried numerous times to throw out plot hooks for you, but nothing is working. If your character is so focused on this single goal, there's little reason for the character to stay with the group, and it may be best for you to make a new character. Or for your character to not be so narrow in focus. This is nothing against you as a player, but this character is not functional for this campaign."

[Telok]

Ah, your player needs a hit with the cluebat. He has the plot leads that he wants but he doesn't see them because they aren't in the form of a monster to kill for xp and magic items.

Choose either your cult or the strange necromancer and steal the plot items from him. Then have someone mysterious hire him to raid the lost library of <something magic> for a couple of paticular books, they will pay him in powerful corpses or necromancy scrolls. When the party exits the dungeon and tries to get their reward have whoever didn't steal the plot items attack and take the books. In that fight have one side use some powerful or interesting undead that he can't control or take over, but the other side can take over those undead because of the plot items.

That should make the clues more obvious, plus adding some books about these sorts of things in the library (but he only finds those if he actually looks for anything but the quest item books).

Also, a nemesis is a good thing but the Head of Vecna is better.

[tribalxgecko]

Thanks for the ideas and suggestions. Going to jot them down and see what I can do next week when we meet up for the next game. Hopefully, between me talking to him, and the suggestions here, I can get him motivated to do more than his one thing.

weckar: His Wis is 16.

[(Un)Inspired]

This is kinda a good example of why plot based games don't really work that well.

It can be more difficult but its often more fruitful to let your characters explore the world you've created on their own. Whatever they want to try to do, you create. When you try and set them up as great saviors or heros then you end up getting into motivation railroading situations.

You say that the other players aren't really interested in doing what your necromancer wants to do but you also say that he's leading them around like a pied piper. If they're willing to go with him on his hijinks let them, if they get feed up with either doing his bidding or start to have moral qualms about what he's doing then let them confront him with accusations in game.

It doesn't sound like you Necromancer is an unreasonable dude I doubt he would be upset if his motivations ran perpendicular to the party and they turned on him eventually because of it.

[veti]

Z3re: I had the same idea as well, but his comment to that was that he would let them take over the world and do all the hard work for him, then he would walk in and take his nemesis' place.

Then the nemesis's plan/approach is not compatible with this. Instead of "building a necropolis, then expanding it to take over the world", the nemesis's plan involves an unthinkably impregnable fortress (which he never, under any circumstances whatsoever, leaves - think Sauron in LotR, or Dagoth Ur in 'Morrowind'), and a slowly spreading plague.


I did get him really interested in the idea of becoming a Lich (since it fills that undead king / commander roll). So I was thinking of maybe making some sort of idea that there is only 1 true lich (maybe an artifact or something that turns a person into a lich). And if he wants to become a lich, he needs to take out the current one. That would give him a purpose. Especaially if I make the current lich the head of one of their enemy group / guilds...A thought anyway.

How about "the process of becoming a lich is a very obscure, arcane secret, which can only be pieced together by combining knowledge from multiple different extremely rare tomes, and quite possibly an artifact or two thrown in?" Then you've got a set of McGuffins that the player would be interested in questing for. From then on, if you're having trouble getting him on board, tell him that a quest's rewards might include, if not one of these, then at least a clue to one of them.

Alternatively, he could try tracking down an existing lich and beating the secret out of it. Then build that as an adventure, and good luck to him...

[BRC]

You've been more than patient with him. I know plenty of DM's who wouldn't have bothered to indulge this.

You HAVE been offering him what he wants. The Staff, Scrolls, and Discs are a path to MORE POWER, he just isn't investigating them.

First, is the Player still interested in the game? Ask him what he means by "more Power", because mysterious magical items that warrant further investigation apparently don't cut it.

That said, be careful about allowing this to overwhelm the campaign. If you have to hang every adventure hook with a sign that says "This way to ULTIMATE NECROMATIC POWER" it will get old fast.

[kenjigoku]

Z3re: I had the same idea as well, but his comment to that was that he would let them take over the world and do all the hard work for him, then he would walk in and take his nemesis' place.



Then the nemesis's plan/approach is not compatible with this. Instead of "building a necropolis, then expanding it to take over the world", the nemesis's plan involves an unthinkably impregnable fortress (which he never, under any circumstances whatsoever, leaves - think Sauron in LotR, or Dagoth Ur in 'Morrowind'), and a slowly spreading plague.


Expanding on veti's idea, you could make his nemesis the antithesis of his character. The player wants to be the "Lord of Undead, Ruler of the World". How about dropping hints of a "Humble Paladin of the People, Protector of the Innocent and Champion of Freedom".

If you market as the "Paladin" as more capable than his own character, going out to do stuff just for the sake of becoming more powerful both financially and individually become a strong motivator.

[Metahuman1]

Dangle an Artifact in front of him, but make him aware that the protections on such things are far beyond him.

Then let him summon a demon, and get the demon to be amused by the puny human with an inkling more power then most, and send him on missions that, in the demon's arrogance, it's sure are gonna be suicide missions to get powerful stuff. Spell Books, rune staffs, Pearls of Power, you know, good stuff for Wizards to get as a reward. Heck the Demon could even provide a cover the necromancer could use so that he can drag the party along, cause the demon will figure "en, why watch one get killed when I can watch a group get killed?"

That way he can learn new spells and get better gear and experience to get more powerful, and the cover he's using will serve as a good motive for the rest of your party.

[Morphie]

What about the alignment of the rest of the party?
You've said already that everyone gets along fine and every player has its own motivation to play, but from I've read I think that the other players are just passively following what their "leader" wants to do. Don't they have any goals they want to achieve?
My advice is: Ask the other players what they want to do. The necro can be the leader, but if they don't find what he wants to do to be something interesting for them, they can (and should) put their foot down and decide to go another way.
There are several differences between a leader and a dictator - The leader should decide on what's best for the group by listening to his team and aiming to make everyone satisfied to a certain extent, he shouldn't just tell them: "Hey, I want more power so we'll be going this way, please don't destroy our enemies too much because I want them as zombies later."
This is a group game afterall, and they seem to behaving like the zombies the necro wants to control.

OH, and +1 on the idea of a nemesis that's not a necro but a Good Cleric: A well-built Radiant Servant of Pelor would show him that he has a lot of work to do in order to become the uber lord of evilness.

[Raven777]

Unless, of course, that is not the game that the other PCs want to play or that the DM wants to run. Then you can either a) stop the entire campaign, because it is not the game you want to run, or b) continue the campaign but npc one character, so that the DM can run the game he wants to run and the other players can play the game they want to play, or c) resign yourself to running a campaign you don't want to run, and have the other players resign themselves to playing a game they don't want to play, because apparently only one player's wishes matter and no one else's.

However, we will both agree that advice on which character designs not to follow should ideally be given before it becomes necessary to remove one player's character. Shaping a story while safeguarding player agency is best done proactively, not reactively.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Try dangling come adventures geared for other players. You mention a lot of ones just for him; help to get the others involved. If he balks give him the choice: adventurer or NPC. DnD.is not a game about people who stay at.home.

[Z3ro]

Z3re: I had the same idea as well, but his comment to that was that he would let them take over the world and do all the hard work for him, then he would walk in and take his nemesis' place. So I kinda made the idea moot, as if his nemesis takes over and creates a necropolis like the player wants, in kinda fudges up the rest of the campaign. I mean, I could go with it, but the PC's wanted a more adventurous political sort of game, not an undead based game, which the other 3 didn't have a whole lot of interest in.


This is my favorite, and easy to fix. His nemisis didn't steal the artifact to take over the world; his nemisis stole the artifact to destroy it. And the nemisis is going through a dungeon to find the only red dragon capable of doing so, or something similar.

[Asteron]

Instead of a Necromancer Nemesis, give an undead killer Nemisis. He's gained enough power to attract the notice of a powerful cleric of Lathander/Pelor/Undead-hating-deity. He's on his way with his crew to shut the necromancer down before the necromancer gets any more powerful.

There are always those who oppose every type of evil. The party shouldn't be the only ones objecting to his descent into darkness...

Adventure is coming to him, whether he wants it or not!

[atemu1234]

I used this idea (kinda cribbed it from buffy): have him hit with a spell that makes it nigh impossible to harm nonevil living things without being damaged. Make him have to get his killing fix by being good and killing the monsters you place in front of him. He seems somewhat selfish: teach him to be a team player by showboating him into a support role.

[IIzak]

I've heard you say a couple times that all your player wants to do is visit the temple of his goddess and figure out how to become more powerful/necromancy-ish. Let them go to the temple then. They've heard rumors that its overrun by cultists, so going there is probably a bad idea. If they do it anyway, then I'm sorry, they were warned.

by the sound of things your PC seems to think that he can just make people do whatever he wants, but he'd be in for a rude awakening if he walked into a group of angry cultists that clearly don't like the god he worships and said "You all work for me now."Let him deal with the consequences of that.

I also agree that you should encourage your other players to explore their own motivations a little more and perhaps be a little more vocal with what they want to do at the table. That should help keep story a little more on the rails, as the other players decide that what they want to do is also important.

[tribalxgecko]

This is not a post just to bump / rehash an old thread, I just figured that since it dealt with the same player / pc, and is along the same lines, this would be the easiest way to get some feedback. Thus, people could read through past stuff if they wanted to get an idea what is going on. It is a bit of a rant and plead for help. It is a long post, I am really sorry, but I want to make sure that those who are willing to read it and reply are able to get as much info as they need to help me out.

OK, so, we have had 2 sessions since when this was originally posted and discussed. I talked to the player, and he basically just kept the same basic thing: He wants to take over the world with his undead. He is not evil yet, but between being a tiefling, working with the necromantic arts, and the chaos around him (adventuring, death, powerful magics / greed), he would begin to slide into more of an evil role. OK, yeah, I get that...sorta. In hopes of getting a little more info, I had each player write down on a 3x5 card 1 secret about their character, 1 motivation / goal, and 1 enemy / rival. I figured that would give me some good stuff to work with for all of them. He wrote :"To take over the world (secret)", "To take over the world (goal)", "the living (enemy / rival)". Not what I was looking for. When I asked him to elaborate more he flipped out and told me he was not writing me a short story and that we went over this when I called him...blah blah blah.

Fast forward to last nights session. They went back to the wizard tower a couple weeks ago, did some investigating, found 2 (out of 3) parts to a 'golden seal' that works as a key to open a crypt of a long dead king. They searched out a general of the cult they have been dealing with, who has the 3rd part. Then the negotiating began and things went down hill. I don't know if this is something I did (if so please point it out). Or if it is just the player in question being a pain. Or maybe I am taking it a bit to serious / personal.

They player jumped in on the negotiating. He would give them 1 piece of the shard in return for a small ship which they have been wanting (their home is a small island [think hawaii]). The second piece he would give them at some other point. Obviously the cult leader wanted both, negotiations went back and forth a bit, and finally they settled on something. Basically, the player was giving them 1 part of key now, getting ship, and dropping second part of key in a safe at a city for the cult leader to get. Sounded ok to me / cultist. But the player then changed plans, and wanted to speak to the cultists 'boss' and determined that the others were going to camp out in the cultist grounds until the 'boss' showed up...and I don't know what else. Regardless, 2 of the players (the barbarian and thief), were not happy with this at all. They did not want to leave the isle (their home), in the hands of the cultists, which they would have been doing. So, while the others slept, the thief stole the 2 shards they found, and they met with the cultist and negotiated terms without the wizard player. They got the ship, freed the slaves, and had the cultists leave the isle; and the cultist got the keys.

This is where things went sour. The wizard player basically had a tantrum, and I can't tell where the pc ends and the player begins. The player was obviously upset that he was not consulted about this, that the thief and barb stole the key shards from him, negotiated the terms, and followed through with it all. He was upset that he lost his 'leverage' of having the key shards, and all around just upset. He said he was acting that way because that is how his PC would act. But I know it was just as much of a personal issue, as it was a character issue.

So, next day (in game terms). The wizards basically just headed off to get the ship, and is killing whoever and whatever that is in their way. Just cause he is 'mad'. This included the town mayor (behind the other players backs while they were buying some gear), a merchant whose wagon was stuck in the mud (Fireball), a 12 year old kid who was about to get attacked bu a monstrous spider (Magic Missile), and the boy's father who came running to help the child (Acid Arrow). (note that the merchant and boy were potential seeds to go do something / adventure, which the player knew and later after the game said he did not want to deal with because he wants to go get their ship so they can do stuff).

I stopped the game at this point, cause I was frustrated, and I could see that the thief and barbarian players were getting angry too. And so, now I come here looking for some input.

Is it just me, or am I wrong to be getting frustrated with all of this?

Did I make a mistake somewhere? Maybe I should not have had the Thief and Barbarian steal the key shards and negotiate terms? I do not allow pointless thievery or stealing from one another (i know that creates game conflict). But this was story related, made sense for their characters, and they did not want to have to deal with the big bad evil witch lady right now, knowing they could not handle her and she would just kill them and take the key (their words not mine). Further, I am pretty sure they see where the wizard pc is going (being evil / dickish), and are trying to avoid that or slow him down till they can figure out what to do. So, on a game and story level, this seemed like a perfectly fine idea to me, and made for some great potential. They saved the day, and are heroes, but at a greater possible cost.

It has almost reached that point where I just want to kill the frustrating PC off, because I can, and it would alleviate that potential headache (though I am sure I will have to deal with the players complaining himself). I warned him that if he becomes to evil to soon, then he will lose his character (he did not take me serious). I told him that killing people for no reason will have repercussions (obviously he did it anyway. And he hides behind the "i am playing my character how he should be played" gimmick. And that it is now the other PC's problems because they have to deal with the pissed off wizard and his actions since they betrayed him. :smallfurious::smallfurious::smallfurious:

Sorry if this comes off as a rant, I suppose it is. This is my first time DMing in about 13 years (2nd or 3rd time ever). So I am getting both frustrated and overwhelmed, really with just this one player. He is a great friend outside of the game as well as a business partner. He has recently went through a really messy divorce and child custody case, and really looks forward to hanging out and getting away from the real world for a bit. But still....I just don't know...:smallfrown:

[Chaos2120]

It seems to me, that this player isn't really interested in anything other than what he wants. I personally love what the other players did to thwart the necromancers plans. That's exactly what needed to happen, and adds nice dynamics and twists into the group. Now the wizards reaction, both as a player and a character, I feel are a bit over the top. Going on a killing spree should give him some evil ticks on his alignment, in fact, I'd say he is borderline evil now, if not fully. Killing a small child for no reason kinda seals that deal. I'd have a decidedly good, evil smiting party on his trail now. That kind of destructive behavior had consequences.

It sucks this player is doing this to your campaign. His "quest for power and necromancy" seems like it's becoming an excuse to do what he wants. And if that's the case, if personally give him some options:

A) hand over his character, he's now a villian, and the player needs to make a new one.
Be) you send an overpowering party after him and they kill him.

I know they aren't great options, but at this point, it's not like there is much other choice. Evil campaigns are fine and dandy, except when it's only one party member that wants to go that route. There has to be some compromise or it's no fun for the rest of the group, DM included. And it's pretty obvious he isn't willing to compromise. Just my $.02

[Fitz10019]

This character is now an evil NPC, and if the player wishes to continue the story of his quest to become powerful, he will have to assume the role of DM.

You should discuss this with the whole group, so it will be clear who agrees and who does not, and it shouldn't be perceived as you stepping on his character choices.

Or maybe this guy simply doesn't fit the play style of the rest of the group.

If he's not ready to DM, tell him his character exits stage right, and he should make a new character with different goals to fill the time until he's ready to DM.

[Chaos2120]

I don't recommend handing over the DM reins to him. It's obvious by what we've read that he's not ready to assume that role. DMing requires you to care about the group as a whole and as individual players. You need to take into consideration, all the wants of ALL the players and try and make the game enjoyable for EVERYONE. It's pretty obvious that he doesn't really care about how the others feel or play, and he's simply out to do what he wants.

[Telok]

Well your problem PC is evil now. This is fine, it's a choice he's made. Murdering children in a fit of pique is a typical chaotic evil response.
Chaotic Evil, "Destroyer"

A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. Thankfully, his plans are haphazard, and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.
What you're dealing with now is your reaction to the player/character trying to derail your plans and ignoring adventure hooks. The best advice I can give you is to free yourself from emotional attachment to your pre-planned plot. This is what is causing you grief. You may have a wonderful adventure and facinating plot all planned out, it may be a grand work of art that is spiritually rewarding for anyone who takes part, but ou have to let it go. You can re-use it later, either in this game or in another.

Once you've done that you can move towards a slightly more sandbox style of play. You don't have to go all the way, just let things develop in response to the character's actions. Did they murder the mayor in secret? Then there's a dangerous murderer on the loose! Perhaps the next mayor is chosen for his law and order policy and sets up checkpoints at the town gates and institutes an adventurer tax to pay for them. Did someone witness the murder? Congradulations, the killer is now a wanted man with a bounty on his head. Bounty hunters and paladins will be arriving shortly. Was the priest who was going to ask you to investigate the noises in the crypt killed? In a month the boss mummy of that quest emerges from the dungeon and unleashes a horde of undead on the town, and the NPC who could cure Mummy Rot is dead.

Don't bother trying to punish anything and don't stress about you plot. The players are making their own plot by their actions and all you have to do is to let the NPCs react like normal people would react.

If all else fails you can set up an adventure with a covey of hags (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hag.htm#seaHag). The next little old lady who gets Fireballed might kill him with a look.

[(Un)Inspired]

Well your problem PC is evil now. This is fine, it's a choice he's made. Murdering children in a fit of pique is a typical chaotic evil response.
Chaotic Evil, "Destroyer"

A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do. He is hot-tempered, vicious, arbitrarily violent, and unpredictable. If he is simply out for whatever he can get, he is ruthless and brutal. If he is committed to the spread of evil and chaos, he is even worse. Thankfully, his plans are haphazard, and any groups he joins or forms are poorly organized. Typically, chaotic evil people can be made to work together only by force, and their leader lasts only as long as he can thwart attempts to topple or assassinate him.
What you're dealing with now is your reaction to the player/character trying to derail your plans and ignoring adventure hooks. The best advice I can give you is to free yourself from emotional attachment to your pre-planned plot. This is what is causing you grief. You may have a wonderful adventure and facinating plot all planned out, it may be a grand work of art that is spiritually rewarding for anyone who takes part, but ou have to let it go. You can re-use it later, either in this game or in another.

Once you've done that you can move towards a slightly more sandbox style of play. You don't have to go all the way, just let things develop in response to the character's actions. Did they murder the mayor in secret? Then there's a dangerous murderer on the loose! Perhaps the next mayor is chosen for his law and order policy and sets up checkpoints at the town gates and institutes an adventurer tax to pay for them. Did someone witness the murder? Congradulations, the killer is now a wanted man with a bounty on his head. Bounty hunters and paladins will be arriving shortly. Was the priest who was going to ask you to investigate the noises in the crypt killed? In a month the boss mummy of that quest emerges from the dungeon and unleashes a horde of undead on the town, and the NPC who could cure Mummy Rot is dead.

Don't bother trying to punish anything and don't stress about you plot. The players are making their own plot by their actions and all you have to do is to let the NPCs react like normal people would react.

If all else fails you can set up an adventure with a covey of hags (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/hag.htm#seaHag). The next little old lady who gets Fireballed might kill him with a look.

This right here. Plot is the natural enemy of the adventurer and the later will alway flee from the former.

[Torchlyte]

The best advice I can give you is to free yourself from emotional attachment to your pre-planned plot. This is what is causing you grief.

It sounds to me like a plot-centered game is what this DM is interested in. Telling him to play sandbox is worthless advice if he doesn't enjoy DMing a sandbox. This is especially true if his other players enjoy playing a plot-based campaign.

If the DM and other players are happy with a sandbox, then that's the best solution.

If not, just get rid of the player who's flipping out and sending his character on murderous rampages. His presence is a detriment to everyone else's experience.

[(Un)Inspired]

If you're gonna take the problem character down, I'd do it by building a character that can drop him.

Make a lawful good wizard or cleric (or Archivist, the best of both worlds!) that has heard about his wicked ways and has come to challenge him.

He may be acting like a poo but saying rocks fall player dies is gonna make him feel bitter and is gonna seem cheep.

[mucat]

If you're gonna take the problem character down, I'd do it by building a character that can drop him.

Make a lawful good wizard or cleric (or Archivist, the best of both worlds!) that has heard about his wicked ways and has come to challenge him.

He may be acting like a poo but saying rocks fall player dies is gonna make him feel bitter and is gonna seem cheep.
In-game solutions to an out-of-game problem never solve anything.

This guy doesn't seem to care whether anyone else at the table is enjoying the game; it's all about what he wants to do. Confront him about this out-of-game, and don't accept "I'm just playing my character." Ask him to explain how he thinks his actions are making the game more fun for everyone there. If he thinks he has an actual answer, give him a reality check, then work with the whole group, including him, to agree on a gaming style everyone will enjoy.

If he doesn't think your question is an important one, he probably shouldn't be playing.

[Sir Chuckles]

He's no longer playing his character. He's playing his own goal, using a character as the conduit to voice them. Out of character, he's angry. In character, he's jumped off the slippery slope and swan dived into the pits of Evul. Not Evil. Evul. The brand of Evil somewhere between "Bad Anime" and "Bond Villain".

Mucat is absolutely right. I don't think it's the style of his character, but his style that is causing a conflict. As DM Secret Attack 1: Diplomacy did not work, it's time for DM Secret Attack 1.5: Diplomacy, with a small conditional ultimatum. Removing the character might work for a time, and that might be all you need. Give him the "Character Exits Stage Left" option, but the other option being "Character Exits Stage Acid Breathing Shark". That's the first side of the condition. The other side is "Clear up your act and don't be disruptive".

Word yourself carefully, use your I-statements, get the opinions of the other two players, <insert other DMing advice>.

[mucat]

To add to my earlier advice...I'm not opposed to characters with their own secrets and agendas. But there are ways to handle it with consideration for the other players.

I also play a character who is obsessed with a research project that would horrify several of the other PCs if they knew about it. (In a low-magic pseudo-Victorian setting where meddling with life and death is a recipe for Horrible Consequences, he intends to restore a loved one to life through Science. Out-of-game, the players know the whole story, but most of the characters have only vague suspicions.)

I bend logic as far as I can to give Doktor Krauss reasons to help the other PCs in their endeavors, even when he would rather be in the lab unravelling the Secrets of Life Itself. When logic refuses to bend far enough -- the party wants to do something that, were Krauss to participate, would leave his brain-in-a-jar wife in severe danger -- he steps offstage for a while, and I play a different character. (It helps that one PC is an airship captain with a bunch of fun and colorful crewmembers who can become temporary PCs.)

And if Krauss's fraying sanity ever snaps completely, or if he simply makes choices that make him an irrevocable enemy to one or more of the other PCs, I'll hand him over to the GM to become an NPC. I like this character a lot, but because I like him, I don't want the other players to remember him as a pain in the ass who dragged the game down for everyone.

Point being, don't let this player claim that he is a hostage to good roleplaying, and is "just playing his character." If the character has ANY claim to belong in the campaign, then the player should be able to think of ways in which he could add to everyone's enjoyment.

[Telok]

It sounds to me like a plot-centered game is what this DM is interested in. Telling him to play sandbox is worthless advice if he doesn't enjoy DMing a sandbox. This is especially true if his other players enjoy playing a plot-based campaign.

This mischaracterizes what I said. I didn't tell him to play a sandbox game, I suggested that he incorporate sandbox elements into the game to allow the NPCs to deal with a murdering maniac.

In addition it sounded like most of the DMs distress came from the disruption of the game's plot. Plots don't normally survive active player characters, you really shouldn't get too attached to them.