[3.5] Aiming for the head...

[Yael]

So, my entire party and I had a discusion with a player, he was arguing that if he aims to the head with a bow, he will absolutely kill any oponent without rolling damage, and just because he bypassed AC, he should get a kill everytime he hits.

We all told him hundreds of times that IS NOT THAT WAY, but he won't listen, so I came up with the object AC thingy, and my DM ruled that the AC would be equal to the small object's AC + the character's AC to determine whether you hit or not the head; however, we know it's not that way, and it should be a way to, by rules, shut him up so we can play normally (because of his arguments, my DM even ended up crying for the stress...)

So, here I am... Conker the king... oh wait.. No!


Any help with that "aiming for the head", and, if it is posible, how to determine it? Feats? Somehow?

[AlsoD]

I think the best way to adjudicate a character aiming for the head is to ask that player to not come back any more.

[lonewulf]

Just because you hit the persons head doesn't mean it's a DIRECT hit. You could catch them in the ear, taking it completely off. That wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. You could catch them through their cheek, dislocating the jaw and hurting like hell...wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. It could take them in the eye but without going through to the brain...painful as all hell but not an instant kill. There could be an argument for auto-killing on a critical for head-shots. But even then I would rule that it is only an auto-kill if you get a crit and a natural 20 on the crit confirmation. Don't know if there are any solid rules for head-shots tho.

[XionUnborn01]

If the player is that disruptive over something like aiming for the head and wanting an instant kill, and considering that it went to the point of your DM crying, I would absolutely agree that you should talk to them and say they need to stop because it's not the rules and it's not how you play and if they persist, tell them to no longer show up at the sessions.

Otherwise, if you're insistent on keeping them around, you could come up with some convoluted feat that lets them aim and get bonus damage, allowing for them to aim at the head while taking a minus to hit and if they succeed, the target gets a Reflex or Fort save or something.

[FidgetySquirrel]

Personally, I prefer called shot to the nuts.

[Dunditschia]

Maybe make clear to him that aiming for the head and hitting the enemy is not the same thing as hitting the enemy in the head? The shot may very well not go through his skull, hurting the enemy, but not killing him. Contrary to aiming for the torso, being off by just a few inches means the shot misses completely, instead of just hitting the enemy in the side. So it's a higher risk/higher reward consideration.

In melee, you can just take power attack and trade a lower chance for hitting someone for a larger amount of damage (e.g. you aim for the head, which is smaller, but will damage the enemy more if hit).
I don't know of any similar feat for ranged weapons, but you might want to make one for him (maybe limiting it to 30 feet, for balance), if he insists. That would be a pretty simple and logical way: he would be doing more damage per shot that hits, but hit a lot less.

There's already a feat similar to this for thrown weapons, Power Throw for thrown weapons:
http://dndtools.eu/feats/complete-adventurer--54/power-throw--3329/

[FidgetySquirrel]

I don't know of any similar feat for ranged weaponsThere's always the PF feat. I think it's called deadly aim. It functions like a ranged power attack.

[Slipperychicken]

Let him aim for the head. Normal attack roll resolution. If he crits, say it was a successful headshot and have him roll damage normally.


Also, Henry the 5th took an arrow to the face and survived. It's not an instant, automatic kill. Just hard to deal with unless you have good medical care (like, oh I don't know, magic healing spells?).

[eggynack]

I would just agree to play the game as he says as soon as he can find any sort of rules citation for the game working that way. He will not, because it doesn't exist, but if he finds something in the rules that does satisfy him, then huzzah for everyone. The onus is not on you to argue that he's wrong, but on him to argue that he's right. If he calls forth the mighty forces of logic and common sense, point out drown healing, and tell him that those things have no place in the game. And then show him some true stories of people who got shot in the head and survived, cause they exist.

[Glimbur]

Alternately, have a monster shoot him in the head and insta-kill him.

But seriously, it sounds like you don't actually have a rules question, you have a 'how do I deal with a problem player' question. I'd suggest having one person sit down with the problem player in a neutral setting (outside the game) and explain what is wrong. If that doesn't work, have the group talk with the player (still outside the game). If that doesn't work, you might need to find a new player.

[Vangor]

So, my entire party and I had a discusion with a player, he was arguing that if he aims to the head with a bow, he will absolutely kill any oponent without rolling damage, and just because he bypassed AC, he should get a kill everytime he hits.

We all told him hundreds of times that IS NOT THAT WAY, but he won't listen

This is not the real world. Creature types are meant to confer advantages and disadvantages based somewhat on real world archetypes and anatomy and similar. Weapon types are meant to do similar. However, these are not meant to be a perfect model. Asking for this to be a perfect model is inviting session after session of rules writing and excessive rolling. Rather, the game is meant to model combat in a way which makes sense in mechanics. Does this creature have anatomy? I am able to deal critical damage. Is this creature large? I have an easier time hitting but not necessarily penetrating armor, and the creature has a longer reach and greater strength. These are basics.

[lonewulf]

Alternately, have a monster shoot him in the head and insta-kill him.

If he continuously argues despite all of your efforts...do what ^^^he^^^ said. If he wants his headshots to insta-kill then ALL headshots instakill. Have the enemies relentlessly aim for the head until he gets frustrated as all hell. Not the ideal solution but troublesome players that won't listen to reason need to be taught a lesson.

[No brains]

Let him aim for the head. Normal attack roll resolution. If he crits, say it was a successful headshot and have him roll damage normally.


Also, Henry the 5th took an arrow to the face and survived. It's not an instant, automatic kill. Just hard to deal with unless you have good medical care (like, oh I don't know, magic healing spells?).

In the same vein, Xiahou Dun got shot in the eye with an arrow and survived. He then pulled the arrow-impaled eye from his head, ate it, and immediately resumed his military carreer. This freaked everyone right the blank out. IRL he supposedly retreated between the wound and the snack, but RoTK tells it in a much more metal way.
There have also been news reports of animals continuing to live regularly after being shot through the head. I remember hearing this happen to a deer, a cat, and possibly some fowl. Against any animal medium or larger, it might not even slow down.

Furthermore, hitting vulnerable spots for extra damage is covered in sneak/ death attack. Tell him he can play it by the books you provide... or those somewhere else.:smalltongue:

[Yael]

I think the best way to adjudicate a character aiming for the head is to ask that player to not come back any more.

We thought of that, but he is our GM's best friend, so he has to consider it (even though that happened, friendship is friendship.)


Just because you hit the persons head doesn't mean it's a DIRECT hit. You could catch them in the ear, taking it completely off. That wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. You could catch them through their cheek, dislocating the jaw and hurting like hell...wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. It could take them in the eye but without going through to the brain...painful as all hell but not an instant kill. There could be an argument for auto-killing on a critical for head-shots. But even then I would rule that it is only an auto-kill if you get a crit and a natural 20 on the crit confirmation. Don't know if there are any solid rules for head-shots tho.

Exact same thing I told him, "maybe you hit on the ear, not killing", but he said: DUDE IF YOU GET HIT ON THE HEAD YOU DIE, AND I AM AIMING FOR THE HEAD, AND THE d20 SAID I HIT, SO IT'S DEAD.


If the player is that disruptive over something like aiming for the head and wanting an instant kill, and considering that it went to the point of your DM crying, I would absolutely agree that you should talk to them and say they need to stop because it's not the rules and it's not how you play and if they persist, tell them to no longer show up at the sessions.

Otherwise, if you're insistent on keeping them around, you could come up with some convoluted feat that lets them aim and get bonus damage, allowing for them to aim at the head while taking a minus to hit and if they succeed, the target gets a Reflex or Fort save or something.

Thought of that so, however it would be a powerful feat for martial characters (and probably I would try to abuse it too :smallbiggrin:.)


If he continuously argues despite all of your efforts...do what ^^^he^^^ said. If he wants his headshots to insta-kill then ALL headshots instakill. Have the enemies relentlessly aim for the head until he gets frustrated as all hell. Not the ideal solution but troublesome players that won't listen to reason need to be taught a lesson.

Yeah, we should do.

[Calmar]

Alternately, have a monster shoot him in the head and insta-kill him.
However, that's probably the best way to show him why the game handles hits as abstractly as it does.


because of his arguments, my DM even ended up crying for the stress...

ಠ_ಠ

This is a more relevant problem than hit point mechanics.

[eggynack]

Exact same thing I told him, "maybe you hit on the ear, not killing", but he said: DUDE IF YOU GET HIT ON THE HEAD YOU DIE, AND I AM AIMING FOR THE HEAD, AND THE d20 SAID I HIT, SO IT'S DEAD.

As I mentioned above, just show him this (http://www.katu.com/news/local/4870221.html), and also this (http://www.city-data.com/forum/cats/1252427-cat-returns-home-after-surviving-arrow.html), and this (http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=124569), and for bonus points, this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage). People overestimate the lethality of head shots by a lot, and while survival isn't the most common thing in the world, the chances have to go up by a lot when you're dealing with crazy super-humans and hulking monsters.

[Ghen]

I would guess that this player is family to one of the other players in this game or somehow otherwise must be present at these sessions, otherwise it sounds like you would have already shown this person the door.

Assuming this is the case, explain to him that your character isn't aiming for the foot or the left pinky by default, they are trying to cause lethal damage unless stated otherwise by aiming for the head, heart, throat, etc. This is already incorporated into the game mechanics. If he crits, then yeah, he nailed the enemy in the face or whatever (not necessarily an auto-kill). If he just hits, then explain to him that he still clipped the enemy with an arrow (or whatever) somewhere less than vital. If he misses, then the arrow flies wide or something.

On the other hand, if this player is not necessarily tied down to the game area, do not be afraid to boot him. A big part of D&D is respect for your fellow players and your DM, and his behavior that stops the entire game and burns everyone's time is not part of this behavior. Try to work with him insofar as you feasibly can, but if he persists, show him the door.

I don't feel that making this a house rule and then having all enemies aim for his head is an ideal solution (though you know this person best and how they would react to it, so use your own judgement). Many would consider this combat to be confrontational to the player and may make his arguments worse and waste everyone's time further. I would suggest diffusing the situation rather than enflaming it.

[Red Fel]

Exact same thing I told him, "maybe you hit on the ear, not killing", but he said: DUDE IF YOU GET HIT ON THE HEAD YOU DIE, AND I AM AIMING FOR THE HEAD, AND THE d20 SAID I HIT, SO IT'S DEAD.

Ask him for a rules citation. Seriously. Ask him where in the books it says that.

If he continues to assert absurd concepts like "realism" or "for real, you guys," roll up a newspaper and bop him on the head. Not gently, but not hard. Then ask, "Dead yet?" If he says no, repeat a few times.

If he persists, consider using a book.

As a rule, raising your voice shouldn't win you an argument with the DM, and making the DM cry by being rude doesn't count. (Giving the DM a nervous breakdown because your character completely derailed the plot, on the other hand? +50 points.) This person is showing signs of being a bad player, and that merits out of character intervention.

Also, somebody give that DM a hug. No DM needs to cry like that. Not unless I'm involved.

[Zanos]

This topic makes my head hurt. I kind of want to punch this person.

I'd probably punch them and throw them out of my group. Since he's someone's friend though, I advise telling the DM to take a hard stance, because I doubt it will end with instakill headshots.

This doesn't sound like the kind of individual that cares about logic or reason or rules, but here's some potential arguments i'm sure he'll shoot down(heh).
-Their armor slowed the arrow down enough that it hit them, but didn't penetrate. It hits for normal damage.
-The partially dodged it, because they aren't stationary targets. It hits for normal damage.
-Whatever it is isn't human, or isn't a mundane human(above level 3 or so). This is a fantasy game, and many creatures, including supernaturally powerful humanoids, can survive an arrow to the face.

[A Tad Insane]

Ok here's what you do. Next time he tries this, add size modifiers and full dexterity ac. When he hits it, say "congrats, your arrow hit him in the head. His helmet to be exact, roll for damage"
If he continue, point out how a high level character can survive falling from terminal velocity, you can dodge a fireball inside said fire ball, and magic.

[Vedhin]

If he continue, point out how a high level character can survive falling from terminal velocity, you can dodge a fireball inside said fire ball, and magic.

This is the best advice I could offer, but it's already been said.

Actually, my best advice would be to kick him out, or at least point out that arguing with your friend to the point where they cry is not something that is to be done.

[lonewulf]

If he doesn't like the rules of D&D then why is he even playing D&D? Maybe he should go play one of the FPS games where head-shots are king.

[Ghen]

Whatever you do, Urashima, please let us know. I'm interested to see what you try, wether or not it works, and how the rest of your group handles the situation.

[Brookshw]

Lots of good advice so far.

What other games does he play? Final fantasy? Pick some that he's familiar with and draw the parallel. Try and explain via things he's familiar with.

Otherwise best I can think of is that he's trying for a ranged coup....

[squiggit]

The d20 doesn't say he hit their head, it says he hits the enemy. Roll low damage? You hit their shoulder, or grazed their ear. Rolled a crit? Well there's your headshot. Massive damage kill? There's your instant kill.

Incidentally, remind him that high level d20 fighter can disembowel himself with his own sword and just shrug it off when discussing what sort of damage counts as an instant kill.

[Jeff the Green]

This sounds like a good time to go on an expedition to Acephalia, the magical homeland of gelatinous cubes, gibbering mouthers, and hydras.

[ArqArturo]

Personally, I prefer called shot to the nuts.

I'm guessing you're Familiar with Combat Arms.

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110309022434/combatarms/images/f/f3/Nutshot.png

[Yael]

Actually we had a lot of problems even before the subject of the "instakill" showed up. He was attacking a person in front of his house, and he rolled, he immediatly rolled up damage and told that he killed the man. The DM said that he didn't hit, but he argued that it was an NPC, that obviously hit, and that that man isn't wearing armor, so he can't have more than 10 AC and it would be a direct hit. Yet again, he didn't listen because he thought it was a commoner, when nobody told he was, also no one stated that he wasn't a high level adventurer that retired and lived his life as a blacksmith, nor he was a monk (lol) with a lot of wis and dex ending up in high AC.

It passed like an hour before he showed up again, yelling at us that with a tumble check he could evade the enemy's attacks without taking AC into acount, just because his character is way too reflexive and a tumble check would put him out of danger. We told him not, but he said: NO DUDE, IF YOU JUMP BACKWARDS YOU WON'T GET HIT! USE LOGIC, THIS GAME IS ABOUT LOGIC. So.... here you go...

Then, he was crying (not literally) because he couldn't climb an entire wall (of aprox 30ft) in one round when his roll was 15 (total.) Look, i'm not that used to the rules of climbing flat-vertical surfaces, but a 15 shouldn't be enough to climb that in just ONE ROUND, right?

[eggynack]

You should maybe have him be not where you are. Maybe include some arbitrary face slapping when it happens.

[andromax]

I would give the player a recreational bow and arrow in a back yard, draw a smiley face on a tether ball that is 30' away, give it a gentle push so its got a bit of movement to it around the pole, and start hitting him with a nerf bat and tell him if he can hit the tether ball every time he aims at it that he can make attack rolls for instant kills every time.

[FidgetySquirrel]

USE LOGIC, THIS GAME IS ABOUT LOGIC. Trust me, you do NOT want your game to go down that road...

[Chaosvii7]

To be fair, if you wanted to use object rules to treat the head as an object then it'd have hardness to bypass, which if anything makes it harder for him.

Our tables have ruled called shots as full-round action attacks against the target with a size penalty based on aim, with every body part always being guaranteed to be smaller than the sum of them. That way regardless of how big something is, the target of the called shot is always getting a bonus to the roll, even if it doesn't totally negate a penalty. The idea is that trying to pinpoint a part of a target that's working with sword or spell in a 6-second timespan with relative precision is tricky to do without some focus(and I suppose a rudimentary understanding of anatomy and physiology.)

That said, based on the behavior of this one player, houseruling just doesn't seem like it's going to work; This person clearly doesn't understand that the game does not and never really did aim to simulate real life. He's clearly not interested in immersing himself in a deep and enriching world of endless adventure, and last but not least based on how you've described it to us he probably isn't remorseful about making the DM cry just to try and prove his point. If he were repentant about at least that fact then he probably would have stopped bothering with trying to justify it and accept that his attitude is ruining the experience of building and exploring a realm of fantasy, which is clearly not his MO.

At this point I would suggest that you sit the DM and player down and tell the player that this is not a one-person game; That his spending time trying to justify actions, constantly denying the DM's word, and also totally destroying the wellbeing of the DM while doing all of this is not appropriate behavior anywhere in life, especially not around a table of people playing Dungeons & Dragons. He is ruining the nature of the game; To bring to life a character whose abilities are fantastical and take them on epic journeys in worlds unlike any other, facing perils and dangers that hold power unimaginable and fame incomparable. If he doesn't want to have fun fleshing out a story and having an adventure in ways he can't possibly imagine, then he simply lacks the imagination to immerse himself in the world of the game.

Tell him to look up Suspension of Disbelief(I deal with this often being an actor by study), and remind him that the DM is always right, and while you have the ability to impact his world, he has the ability to be the world. If he doesn't understand that there's some things he cannot control and that this game isn't aiming to make another facsimile of life(read: to be boring), then he clearly is not cut out for the world of tabletop roleplaying. Ask him to retire his character and leave, perhaps returning if he is willing to understand and consider the community, worldbuilding, sheer imagination, and the storytelling that make up this game.

[ArqArturo]

Me enojan ese tipo de jugadores >:(

When he says that D&D is a game of logic, point out that there's magic, elves, and dragons that freakin' breath fire, so logic is thrown out of the window when there's a gnome riding a red great wyrm and shooting fireballs.

[Red Fel]

When he says that D&D is a game of logic, point out that there's magic, elves, and dragon's that freakin' breath fire, so logic is thrown out of the window when there's a gnome riding a red great wyrm and shooting fireballs.

Alternatively, when he claims it's about logic and realism, ask him to do what his character is doing.

If it's a feat of skill, like climbing a thirty-foot wall in one round (which is six seconds, roughly) ask him to scale a flat wall of the room. Most rooms will have a height of 8-10 feet, give or take, so tell him he has six seconds to climb that. If it's a combat feat, do it to him. Throw a book at him and tell him to dodge. Smack him in the head and ask if he's dead yet. And so forth.

If he then asserts that he can't do it, but his character can, explain to him that his character can do what the game rules and mechanics say his character can do, and what he's insisting the character can do is not supported by those same rules and mechanics.

Everything but that last bit is a joke, by the way. Don't actually do all of that stuff to him; it won't solve anything, it'll just make him mad. What you should do is sit him down, and explain the last part - that what he's insisting he should be able to do isn't supported by the rules of the game. You can't play Monopoly as the car and claim that you beat the player who plays the little Scottie Dog because cars run over dogs all the time - that's not how Monopoly works, and what he's saying isn't how D&D works.

And if he refuses to budge, boot him. It's harsh but fair. And it doesn't matter if he's close friends with other players or the DM (and I won't get into an argument about what real friends will or won't do to other friends). Sometimes, a person can be a good friend-in-regular-life but a crap friend-at-the-table. Not every friend needs to be included in every activity - and in some cases, it'd be a really, really bad idea. This may be one of those cases.

The next time he tries to argue "using logic" on an Escape Artist check, ask him to make one in real life - by showing him the door.

[Yael]

Trust me, you do NOT want your game to go down that road...

Actually told him the very same thing.


Me enojan ese tipo de jugadores >:(

When he says that D&D is a game of logic, point out that there's magic, elves, and dragons that freakin' breath fire, so logic is thrown out of the window when there's a gnome riding a red great wyrm and shooting fireballs.

A mi tambien me enojan, simplemente juega porque es amigo del DM >:C

Yeah, actually I told him the same: his party member (me) is a freakin' snow elf, here are three things to consider as contadictory to his "logic game" argument:

We are talking about an ELF.
We are talking about a variant of an actual ELF.
Despite the two above, traveling with an elf sems not to be that surprising.

[Sir Chuckles]

Me enojan ese tipo de jugadores >:(

When he says that D&D is a game of logic, point out that there's magic, elves, and dragons that freakin' breath fire, so logic is thrown out of the window when there's a gnome riding a red great wyrm and shooting fireballs.

You mean Feral Dragonborn Dwarf Wildshape Ranger/Warshaper with wings from my sig, right?

The only time logic should ever be applied is for falling rules and drowning rules, and then only to prevent technical teleportation and healing via lungs full of water.

Anyway, it's very obvious he's trying to be creative. Not exceptionally creative, but he's trying. The problem is that he's demanding instant gratification with bonuses that are entirely out of proportion with his ideas. Ask him to tone it back, because many of the demands he's making are within the realm of possibility, but D&D is not logic based, and you should try to help and/or guide him to building a character that CAN do these things.
Like, from Dragon #310, the Targeteer Fighter who can trade attacks per round for increased critical threat range.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Has he... read the rules? Or is he just guessing based on what's written down on his sheet?

[Yael]

Has he... read the rules? Or is he just guessing based on what's written down on his sheet?

Probably the second.

[Bullet06320]

1. Make sure he's read the rules, and has at minimum a basic understanding of the rules as written and commonly interpreted by your group
2. if he wants insta kill head shots, have the enemy do it to him(as has been already stated)
3. http://dndtools.eu/spells/players-handbook-v35--6/protection-from-arrows--2345/ all NPC's now have this spell at will, problem solved
4. an apology to the DM is a must if wants to continue playing

his actions are completely "unsportsmanlike" (not sure if that's the right term, but applies) for what should be a friendly game of DnD

[maniacalmojo]

from what i remember there is a rule about targeting specific body parts but you take a -10 on limbs and -20 on smaller critical locations such as the head or balls. It also adds bonus die not "kills instantly"

[maniacalmojo]

Also a large majority of things in D&D would be relativly unafected by an arrow to the head. Large size+ monsters would get hurt but a rampaging ork i could see just running through it. A dragon would feel a slight itch when you shoot an arrow at it and an undead or slime wont even realize they have been shot. It seems only base race humanoid creatures would be really affected by it. Have most of them be spellcasters and do wind wall or protection from arrows with the previous negative and he wont be able to do much.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

This isn't about head shots. It's about a problem player who uses insane troll logic, willful ignorance of the rules and their intent, and shameless bullying tactics to get any advantage he can... in a pretend game. I have more respect for cheaters, honestly. I know he's the DM's friend, but friends don't have to do every activity together. The DM and group are either going to have to be stern with him ("if you don't stop arguing, your character dies immediately," with follow-through) or kick him out.

[Bullet06320]

from what i remember there is a rule about targeting specific body parts but you take a -10 on limbs and -20 on smaller critical locations such as the head or balls. It also adds bonus die not "kills instantly"

I could be wrong, but I don't recall seeing any in 3.0 or 3.5, I remember when it first came out, and looking for some, there had been rules in 2nd edition, -4 to hit if I recall, and bonus damage x2 I think.
It would be easy to incorportate in 3rd, using a feat similar to power attack with bows(as stated earlier) using point blank shot as a prereq, or power attack for melee. but also an AC bonus to the target since its a smaller target

[Someonelse]

If I were DM I would tell them: "While it is true that a head shot in the real world is a sure kill, in the world of D&D everything has hit points. It is an abstract system meant to represent a pitched battle between legendary heroes and the villains they challenge. I totally agree with you that a head shot should, logically, be an automatic kill, but if I let you do that then everyone will do that, the players and the NPCs. Which means that the next archer you meet who wants to kill you only needs to hit your AC once to do so. Is that really how you want to play this game? Because I would not like that. If you can find or create an RPG system with realistic combat damage I would love to play it, but the game we have gathered here to play today uses a hit point system. You are free to play or not play."

Also, as a house rule, I do allow called shots with a -20 penalty to hit and it automatically does critical damage if you hit. but even in that case hit points still apply, but you can do other things like blind them, or shoot a spell caster in the mouth so they can't use verbal components.

[eggynack]

While it is true that a head shot in the real world is a sure kill...
As I've mentioned a couple of times, this is not a true thing. People get shot in the head and don't die on occasion. Our mental image of this thing, these pretty little headshots (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PrettyLittleHeadshots), is in many ways a fantasy of its own.

[Someonelse]

As I've mentioned a couple of times, this is not a true thing. People get shot in the head and don't die on occasion. Our mental image of this thing, these pretty little headshots (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PrettyLittleHeadshots), is in many ways a fantasy of its own.

In general, surviving a head shot is the exception, not the rule.
also note that I was quoting what I would say in the given scenario, not necessarily my own opinion. In that case it is better to just agree with someone like that to the extent that it doesn't disturb the game.
Also I mentioned my house rule that allows a head shot, which still is not an instant kill.
Do you think maybe you're feeling just a tad bit pedantic?

[eggynack]

In general, surviving a head shot is the exception, not the rule.
True, except heroes are the exception. When a normal guy in the game gets shot right in the head by a powerful archer, he too has a high chance of dying.


Do you think maybe you're feeling just a tad bit pedantic?
Not particularly, no. It's a thing we do a lot, I think, substituting "logic" and "common sense" in for the rules of the game, when the actual reality of the situation is better simulated by those very rules. Sure, in some situations you have to do the whole, "Sometimes it's important for the rules to deviate from reality," song and dance, but this is not one of those situations. Just straight up pointing out that this fellow is simply mistaken in his assertions seems more efficient. Might even knock him on his butt a bit for the next time he seeks to cite "reality" in a rules discussion.

[Dorian Gray]

In general, surviving a head shot is the exception, not the rule.
also note that I was quoting what I would say in the given scenario, not necessarily my own opinion. In that case it is better to just agree with someone like that to the extent that it doesn't disturb the game.
Also I mentioned my house rule that allows a head shot, which still is not an instant kill.
Do you think maybe you're feeling just a tad bit pedantic?

Still though, a headshot from a gun actually does have less than a 50% fatality rate, at least for small arms (obviously not if you got your brains blown out with a .42, but a small pistol, sure). I mean, my friend got a "epee tracheotomy" and was fine a few weeks later- most of the head area isn't the brain, and humans have a fairly thick skull anyways. An arrow to the scalp is more likely to ricochet or stick in the skull cap than it is to penetrate straight through the bone.

But yeah, that is pedantic. Your advice is good, because it makes sense and because you recognize that the problem isn't the rules, it's the player.

[MirthTheBard]

Just to cast my vote with most other people in this thread, this person is a problem player, should probably be kicked out of the group(and personally I think he should be kicked physically too). If your DM/GM cannot see through the "but he/she is my friend!" malarkey then your DM/GM is just as much of the problem for not putting his/her foot down on the subject.

If it keeps up though, with your DM refusing to kick said person and that person also refusing to listen to the rules of the game, then reroll a character designed to just constantly kill the problem players character at the start of each session, so the person is left getting to watch and never ever play, even using his "rules" against him if need be.

Sorry for the harshness, but reading about a person being that rude to his fellow players infuriates me. Your DM really needs to step up and take control, or party vote the player out(more votes than the singular DM+problem player, I'd imagine.)

[Dorian Gray]

If it keeps up though, with your DM refusing to kick said person and that person also refusing to listen to the rules of the game, then reroll a character designed to just constantly kill the problem players character at the start of each session, so the person is left getting to watch and never ever play, even using his "rules" against him if need be.

That... would never, ever work. Out of game problems need to be confronted with out of game solutions. This will just lead to anger and fighting without any sort of resolution.

[MirthTheBard]

That... would never, ever work. Out of game problems need to be confronted with out of game solutions. This will just lead to anger and fighting without any sort of resolution.

It already seems to me like there is anger and fighting without any sort of resolution. And I gave context.

If it keeps up though, with your DM refusing to kick said person and that person also refusing to listen to the rules of the game

I also suggested a solution before suggesting this. I highly doubt the problem player who has been stubborn up until now will have a change of heart if the rest of the party asks him to play nice, and I would imagine even if you ask said player to present rules to back up their argument they will just continue their argument regardless of RAW, since they have seemingly done so already.

[VoxRationis]

Personally, I prefer called shot to the nuts.

The rules state the crotch is a vital area...

If that doesn't work, try Polymorph Other.

But back on topic, you should explain two things:

1) The combat rules are supposed to have a level of abstraction to them, sacrificing a little potential for detail for the benefit of not having to say exactly which kind of attack you're using (at least before Tome of Battle came around).
2) A head shot, as mentioned before, is not an automatic kill. The facial bones can be severely damaged without causing lethality or even tactical incapacitation. Even a direct blow into and through the cranium is not automatically fatal; just ask Phineas Gage. (Of course, such blows would probably have serious long-term effects on the victim, but the personality change Orc #812 goes through after you damage his frontal lobe probably isn't going to be particularly important to the player.)

[Jeff the Green]

Of course, such blows would probably have serious long-term effects on the victim, but the personality change Orc #812 goes through after you damage his frontal lobe probably isn't going to be particularly important to the player.

Actually, there's some debate about the long term effects of Gage's injury. There's reason to believe that his personality changes were either less severe than normally portrayed or decreased over time due to the brain's plasticity (a facet of neurology that was definitely not appreciated at the time).

I think explaining a few things might help here.

First, HP is an abstraction. If it were really meant to model injuries, a person with 1/200 HP would not be in any condition to fight; instead, he's just as dangerous as if he were at full health. This is because keeping track of the body parts hit and how damaged each one is is an enormous pain (c.f. FATAL) and not anyone's idea of fun.

Second, a headshot/arrow to the heart/femoral artery severing is modeled by critical hits.

Finally, past maybe 2rd level (where a critical hit from a bow is likely to kill), and certainly above 6th, you're not fighting normal humans. Ask him if an arrow to the head would kill Superman, Cuchulainn, or Beowulf (the answer is 'no, of course not').

[Tohsaka Rin]

In my experience, not much kills Cu Chulainn, aside from ridiculous overkill.

Tell the player that yes, the game DOES run on logic. And logically, he should follow the RULES that govern how that logic is applied and functions.

Logically, he should be following the rulings of the Dungeon MASTER, because the title isn't just for show. Otherwise, he's like that kid in the group playing pretend, who has 'all powers' and 'nuh-uh, you didn't get me, you missed, I got YOU'.

Nobody likes that kid. Go home, that kid. We're trying to play a game for fun, stop ruining it by trying to 'win'.

[Vedhin]

Given that this is a pattern, that he doesn't really know the rules, and that he doesn't listen when people try to point things out to him, this isn't likely to be remedied easily. The best solution is to just make him leave.


from what i remember there is a rule about targeting specific body parts but you take a -10 on limbs and -20 on smaller critical locations such as the head or balls. It also adds bonus die not "kills instantly"

No such rule in 3.X.

[SliceandDiceKid]

I only read the first page of responses but will say that I mostly agree.

You cannot alter rules like this for ONE person's desires. And if you do not deal with this problem now, you WILL compromise everyone else's experience. DM's friend or not. No other circumstances even matter. If it means he doesn't play anymore to preserve that relationship, that's best. But the DM is the one who determines the ultimate nature of reality. Down to every last detail. I player may, in a civil manner, present a grievance, but the sample behavior you have presented is not appropriate and displays a lack in maturity. Don't let this one person ruin your campaign and divide your group. I've let this happen and I miss those people. Everyone has to learn their place. That's life. There is always a higher authority (unless you are DM).

[FidgetySquirrel]

The rules state the crotch is a vital area...With that, let us all take a moment to ponder the lul potential of a rogue with a nut shot sneak attack build.:smallamused:

[Andezzar]

Exact same thing I told him, "maybe you hit on the ear, not killing", but he said: DUDE IF YOU GET HIT ON THE HEAD YOU DIE, AND I AM AIMING FOR THE HEAD, AND THE d20 SAID I HIT, SO IT'S DEAD.Give him a Gibbs slap and then ask him why he is not dead. Once play resumes, take a bunch of goblins or other ridiculously weak opponents all aiming for the PCs head. Natural 20 always hits regardless of the target's AC.


With that, let us all take a moment to ponder the lul potential of a rogue with a nut shot sneak attack build.:smallamused:How do you think dwarf rogues deal with giants? To add insult to injury make a sap from stone giant parts.

[Zombimode]

I'm guessing you're Familiar with Combat Arms.


More likely, "called shot to the nuts!" is a The Gamers quote.

[Darkweave31]

(because of his arguments, my DM even ended up crying for the stress...)

Just my two cents... He is way out of line. There is absolutely NO reason for the argument to be taken this far even if the rules were on his side.

I'd ask him to leave.

If you feel there is a compelling to continue to game with him, ask him to show where the rules say he can call a head-shot for an instant kill. Don't fall for the "the rules don't say I can't" argument. Final line of defense (which should frankly be the only one needed)...
When everyone gathers around the table to play the game, you're in charge. That doesn't mean you can tell people what to do outside the bounderies of the game, but it does mean that you're the final arbiter of the rules within the game. Good players will always recognize that you have ultimate authority over the game mechanics, even superseding something in a rulebook.

[Trasilor]

This is clearly a problem player rather than a rules clarification.

It is unfortunate that you cannot ask them to leave the group as it is the DM's friend. Although, causing the DM to cry is not something a friend would do.

I suggest you talk to the DM. Let him/her know of your frustration. Remind him/her that he/she is the final arbitrator on rules.

Another possible solution is to ask your current DM if you could DM for a session or two. See how the problem player likes it when all of his head shots are voided by the high tumble skill of the enemy :smallamused:

If you want 'rules' I propose the following:

1) Only works on creatures the same size as you or smaller. Larger creatures are to massive to be effectively hurt in such a way (in essence you are already aiming for this part of their anatomy)

2) Full round action - you must aim

3) +8 to AC for Medium creatures, +12 to AC for small creature, etc for a head shot - these are diminutive to fine sized things (depending on the target) that move much more than the rest of the body and people naturally protect their head (ducking, blocking with arm, etc). As such they get a size bonus to AC and a Dodge bonus to AC.

4) Missing the increased AC does not hit the target even if the result would have hit the unadjusted AC - this is an all or nothing shot.

5) If you hit the target, roll damage normally (include any precision damage but exclude any energy damage - i.e. flaming. Target gets a Fortitude save vs death where the DC = 10 + damage dealt. Failed save and the target dies. If the target makes the save, multiply the damage by the critical multiplier (i.e. treat the attack as if it were a critical). Add energy damage - again treat as a critical (i.e. + 1d6 for flaming, +1d6 +1d10 for flaming burst).

6) Creatures immune to critical hits are immune to this attack.

[FidgetySquirrel]

More likely, "called shot to the nuts!" is a The Gamers quote.The shadow!:smalleek:

[A Tad Insane]

How is this guy the DM's best friend? How? I know I shouldn't be judgement, especially towards someone I haven't met and only know about their worst attributes, but he's acting like a child who claims to win all the imaginary duels "because I have an invincible shield and a gun that goes through all invincible shields except mine". D&D has defined rules on how it works. He's going beyond ignoring them to flat out ignoring reality. That guy at the door could have easily been a high level retired fighter could laugh at that blow or a ranger who could literally matrix dodge it, yet he refuses to even entertain that idea!
The only advise I could give is to tell him to either play by the same rules that EVERYONE IS PLAYING BY, or find something else.

*sigh* I try to believe that all humans are innately good, but some people make it really hard :smallfrown:

[prufock]

The way I see it, you actually have 2 problems:
1. Aggressive problem player.
2. Passive pushover DM.

I don't know how long you've been playing with these people, but the DM should have put his foot down long ago on this, either to make it clear that the rules work the way they do or to kick this guy to the curb for being an unbelievable asshat.

With that in mind, you may be forced to stage a coup here. Either take the other players (assuming there are enough of them) and start another game, with a new DM, and without the problem player, or simply quit the game yourself and do something else you enjoy that won't involve dealing with this person.

[VoxRationis]

The shadow!:smalleek:

The Shadow!:smallfrown:

[Red Fel]

The Shadow!:smallfrown:

The Shadow. :smallmad:

But yeah. Player problem, deal with out of character.

[Nibbens]

I had a player like this before. No amount of explanation will alter his mind because, for him D&D is probably a game to win. There's nothing you can do for this guy. Sorry.

I'd suggest doing things with him other than d&d. Then meet at somewhere else for the D&D games without him. Don't kick him out. Instead everyone should "forget" to talk about it in front of him. When he asks when are you guys playing again, tell him that "we're having trouble setting a date for the next game. Let you know asap."

When he finds out that he's been excluded and lied to just so others can play d&d in peace, he will then get mad and probably want to "unfriend" the DM. Which is EXACTLY what needs to happen because this guy is a jerk wad who doesn't need to be around you guys.

[Chaosvii7]

I'd suggest doing things with him other than d&d. Then meet at somewhere else for the D&D games without him. Don't kick him out. Instead everyone should "forget" to talk about it in front of him. When he asks when are you guys playing again, tell him that "we're having trouble setting a date for the next game. Let you know asap."

When he finds out that he's been excluded and lied to just so others can play d&d in peace, he will then get mad and probably want to "unfriend" the DM. Which is EXACTLY what needs to happen because this guy is a jerk wad who doesn't need to be around you guys.

That's a little rude. There's no reason to be indirect with somebody because he's mean. They need to address the problem head-on, because if they do something like that where they exclude him without a choice or discussion and then he just casually finds out "oh yeah we basically kicked you out" then they'd be no better than him, just to satisfy their desire to play. He is definitely disrupting the health of the game table, but that's not a rightful solution and is the tactic of a cowardly group of players who do not want to stand up for what they believe in, just cut out what they don't.

He's not wrong to think what he thinks, but he's asserting his will in a game that doesn't support the mechanics he wants in a power position that doesn't allow him to assert his will like that. He simply needs to be told that he is disrespecting the rest of the table by trying to do this, and if he doesn't come to terms with it then the group should make a motion to ask him to leave the table for everybody's well-being.

Realistically you should only judge his roleplaying and not him; He clearly doesn't really get roleplaying games like we do, but that doesn't mean that he is vile scum that doesn't deserve the DM's friendship. All it means is that the player just isn't right for D&D. That isn't a problem, but it's certainly not a reason to ostracize him for his behavior, especially not by just severing him from the main group.

Just moving the days around and ignoring the problem isn't going to get rid of it. That's pretty childish logic.

[Nibbens]

That's a little rude. There's no reason to be indirect with somebody because he's mean. They need to address the problem head-on, because if they do something like that where they exclude him without a choice or discussion and then he just casually finds out "oh yeah we basically kicked you out" then they'd be no better than him, just to satisfy their desire to play. He is definitely disrupting the health of the game table, but that's not a rightful solution and is the tactic of a cowardly group of players who do not want to stand up for what they believe in, just cut out what they don't.

He's not wrong to think what he thinks, but he's asserting his will in a game that doesn't support the mechanics he wants in a power position that doesn't allow him to assert his will like that. He simply needs to be told that he is disrespecting the rest of the table by trying to do this, and if he doesn't come to terms with it then the group should make a motion to ask him to leave the table for everybody's well-being.

Realistically you should only judge his roleplaying and not him; He clearly doesn't really get roleplaying games like we do, but that doesn't mean that he is vile scum that doesn't deserve the DM's friendship. All it means is that the player just isn't right for D&D. That isn't a problem, but it's certainly not a reason to ostracize him for his behavior, especially not by just severing him from the main group.

Just moving the days around and ignoring the problem isn't going to get rid of it. That's pretty childish logic.

He made the DM cry. That sounds pretty childish to me... Sorry, just seeing stuff like that makes me cringe and over-react. Apologies to all.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

He's not wrong to think what he thinks, but he's asserting his will in a game that doesn't support the mechanics he wants in a power position that doesn't allow him to assert his will like that. He simply needs to be told that he is disrespecting the rest of the table by trying to do this, and if he doesn't come to terms with it then the group should make a motion to ask him to leave the table for everybody's well-being.Actually he is wrong to think what he thinks. We could dryly go over why it's not logical for arrows to always insta-kill people on a hit, or why it's not logical to just be able to tumble away from all attacks... but if the group goes over it with him (they have), all they get is annoying badgering. He's wrong, and he's being an ass. "Asserting his will" is putting it way too lightly.

Realistically you should only judge his roleplaying and not him;Nope, you can judge his OOC actions as disruptive and mean aside from any RPing.

He clearly doesn't really get roleplaying games like we do, but that doesn't mean that he is vile scum that doesn't deserve the DM's friendship. All it means is that the player just isn't right for D&D. That isn't a problem, but it's certainly not a reason to ostracize him for his behavior, especially not by just severing him from the main group.He makes his best friend cry over a game by badgering him constantly. Sure, not "vile scum," but you don't have to be vile scum to get ostracized.

[BRC]

Has he been playing very long? Did he want to play, or did he join because his friend was DMing?

What I would do is run a brief combat using "His" version of the rules. "The goblin rolled well on his attack roll, he was aiming for your head, so you're dead now." "Oh, they got a good tumble check, your attack misses" ect ect.
He seems to acknowledge the rules, but not respect them as a system.
The real problem is that he's apparently willing to drive the GM to tears to get his way.

Ultimately, this is an attitude problem. The only thing to do is band together and try to get him to accept the rules. Worst case scenario, you and the other players can threaten to walk away if he keeps being disruptive.

[Yael]

Has he been playing very long? Did he want to play, or did he join because his friend was DMing?

He has played before, but he always left after the first sesion because "it's boring" when he does nothing but odd desicions and insulting the DM calling them "awful DM".


What I would do is run a brief combat using "His" version of the rules. "The goblin rolled well on his attack roll, he was aiming for your head, so you're dead now." "Oh, they got a good tumble check, your attack misses" ect ect.
He seems to acknowledge the rules, but not respect them as a system.
The real problem is that he's apparently willing to drive the GM to tears to get his way.

Actually, we've asked him several times if he really has read something relevant, he claims that he has read books like Races of Destiny, Complete Divine and else, but he acts odd when asked about the PHB... He called us (the rest of the party) idiots that don't know how to play the game because he said so, then he wouldn't listen to us...

By the way, he interrupted the DM at every point that wasn't his turn, called the game "boring" several times and yelled at us because we are just bad when he needed OUR help to create up his character because when he got to where we play, he has not any character made up nor an idea of what he was going to play...


Ultimately, this is an attitude problem. The only thing to do is band together and try to get him to accept the rules. Worst case scenario, you and the other players can threaten to walk away if he keeps being disruptive.

I'm afraid so.

[Xerlith]

He has played before, but he always left after the first sesion because "it's boring" when he does nothing but odd desicions and insulting the DM calling them "awful DM".



Actually, we've asked him several times if he really has read something relevant, he claims that he has read books like Races of Destiny, Complete Divine and else, but he acts odd when asked about the PHB... He called us (the rest of the party) idiots that don't know how to play the game because he said so, then he wouldn't listen to us...

By the way, he interrupted the DM at every point that wasn't his turn, called the game "boring" several times and yelled at us because we are just bad when he needed OUR help to create up his character because when he got to where we play, he has not any character made up nor an idea of what he was going to play...



I'm afraid so.

Remind me, why are you playing with him again? He is not anyone's of you friend. He's a self-righteous jerk who wants to be in the center of attention, using "friendship" as an excuse. I have no sympathy for him, only for you, since you have to deal with the guy. Talk with the DM. They're probably too afraid/considerate to take direct steps (I think this was one of the Geek Social Fallacies, by the way... Google it). If talking with the player doesn't help - and I doubt it, judging from what you described here - Just straight out boot him and don't look back.

If that is out of question... Well, someone here's got this signature that says "No gaming is better than bad gaming". I might be paraphrasing. Anyway - Don't accomodate this person in your games, even better in your social circle.

[Brookshw]

I'm in a bit of a punchy mood so I'm going to be direct this time: **** or get off the pot. Confront this or your not going to solve it.

Constructively: he's playing the wrong game, look into white wolf or shadowrun, possibly others. Pick something that has mechanics that match his expectations, cause d&d, they ain't.

[MirthTheBard]

I hope you and the rest of your group are able to successfully change this guy's way of thinking or kick him out. In all seriousness though, unless he's a completely different person when it comes to things other than D&D I would recommend completely cutting ties with him, as based on his personality pertaining to D&D he seems like a scumbag of an individual.

[BRC]

I'm in a bit of a punchy mood so I'm going to be direct this time: **** or get off the pot. Confront this or your not going to solve it.

Constructively: he's playing the wrong game, look into white wolf or shadowrun, possibly others. Pick something that has mechanics that match his expectations, cause d&d, they ain't.
I don't think he WANTS a system that has mechanics for that. I think he wants to be the center of attention, and is trying to bully his way to victory. He's trying to insult, yell, and complain until everybody gives in and lets him have his way.

[Brookshw]

I don't think he WANTS a system that has mechanics for that. I think he wants to be the center of attention, and is trying to bully his way to victory. He's trying to insult, yell, and complain until everybody gives in and lets him have his way.

Sure, hence my first comment.

[Red Fel]

I don't think he WANTS a system that has mechanics for that. I think he wants to be the center of attention, and is trying to bully his way to victory. He's trying to insult, yell, and complain until everybody gives in and lets him have his way.

I agree. This isn't a person who wants any kind of mechanical constraints. Offering him a system that offers what he seems to want isn't going to cut it, because he'll simply make arguments with that one, too. He's not asking for mechanics that let him do X; he's demanding that he be allowed to do X, whatever X is, whenever he wants to, and anyone who disagrees with him is doing everything wrong.

This is a case of human error. More specifically, this human's presence in your group is an error. In the name of civility, I would suggest sitting him down to talk it out, but from the sound of things, he probably won't be interested in listening to you.

And if he doesn't? Introduce him to the door.

[Sir Chuckles]

The way I see it, you have two options:
Boot him immediately or offer to switch to FATAL. If you show him FATAL and he accepts it, boot him harder.

[Yael]

The way I see it, you have two options:
Boot him immediately or offer to switch to FATAL. If you show him FATAL and he accepts it, boot him harder.

I'm sorry if I didn't get the joke n_nU

[Sir Chuckles]

I'm sorry if I didn't get the joke n_nU

FATAL is a system that makes the world cry out in painful unison against, for that instant driving even the most die-hard gamers to believe that what they do is horribly wrong.
It involves a 1000+ page handbook full of everything wrong with mankind. If you show it to a player with a serious face of "We're going to play this" and they don't leave, you either monitor them for illegal activity or keep them for being the closest and most trusting friend in existence.

[Andezzar]

The way I see it, you have two options:
Boot him immediately or offer to switch to FATAL. If you show him FATAL and he accepts it, boot him harder.I'm sorry if I didn't get the joke n_nUYou do not joke about F.A.T.A.L. If you really need to know, UrashimaJamez, google F.A.T.A.L., but I warn you, what was seen, cannot be unseen.

[Yael]

FATAL is a system that makes the world cry out in painful unison against, for that instant driving even the most die-hard gamers to believe that what they do is horribly wrong.
It involves a 1000+ page handbook full of everything wrong with mankind. If you show it to a player with a serious face of "We're going to play this" and they don't leave, you either monitor them for illegal activity or keep them for being the closest and most trusting friend in existence.

This.


You do not joke about F.A.T.A.L. If you really need to know, UrashimaJamez, google F.A.T.A.L., but I warn you, what was seen, cannot be unseen.

Oh, I just saw... What has been done, cannot be undone... The unseen rpg is the deadliest...

[Deaxsa]

You're also making a key mistake: assuming hit points are actually pieces of flesh. i like to think of it as "stamina/Will to fight/Capability to deal with damage." After all, hit points are an abstraction, so TREAT THEM LIKE ONE. once you can bring them below 0, that's when the characters actually start getting physically damaged. However, fast healing/regeneration throw a wrench into the mix, so i'd explain to my players that hit points signify some sort of mix of "endurance/skin toughness/ability to take superficial hits or turn lethal ones into superficial ones" before battle-fatigue sets in and you start actually getting hit.

How is this relevant to the discussion? well, the enemy gets this sweet pool of awesomesauce, as does the player! That's why healing can be so easy to acquire. so the enemy can suck it up, so to speak, until he goes into negatives, and that's how much damage his body can fundamentally take before giving up. UNTIL THAT POINT, however, he's aware and, I don't know, willing away the damage.

Of course, you could just ask if he REALLY wants to play that way, and then cut off is head next session. :smallsigh: (If you want to be REALLY cruel to the player, play this way and kill the OTHER party members. There's no discipline like discipline by your peers. :smallmad:)

[Andezzar]

You're also making a key mistake: assuming hit points are actually pieces of flesh. i like to think of it as "stamina/Will to fight/Capability to deal with damage." After all, hit points are an abstraction, so TREAT THEM LIKE ONE. once you can bring them below 0, that's when the characters actually start getting physically damaged. However, fast healing/regeneration throw a wrench into the mix, so i'd explain to my players that hit points signify some sort of mix of "endurance/skin toughness/ability to take superficial hits or turn lethal ones into superficial ones" before battle-fatigue sets in and you start actually getting hit.Yup, If fireballs actually caused damage consistent with burning, the damage from standing in a 20 ft conflagration should not go away on its own after a couple of days.

[Sir Chuckles]

Yup, If fireballs actually caused damage consistent with burning, the damage from standing in a 20 ft conflagration should not go away on its own after a couple of days.

Nothin' like shakin' off being the center point of an explosion that instantly liquefies lead and gold.

[Krazzman]

First off:
Pathfinder has Rules for this. You can find them on the SRD (d20pfsrd) as "Called Shots".
With rules what happens for legs, knees, elbows, arms, torsos and heads.

With that said...
booting him might not be the way as he has special brownie points with the DM.
Try to reason with the DM first. I doubt he/she wants such a hassle every frigging combat. Then ask the group about it then decide together what to do.

As it has been said: resolve this OOC.

[With a box]

I think he want save-or-die thing
Play a spellcaster who have such things

[aleucard]

I don't know what would help, here. My more sadistic side says to tell him that he has to either wear a shock collar to the game so the rest of the group can halt his idiocy in a timely manner or leave, but since he is somehow (blackmail, maybe?) the DM's friend even after all this, more hostile methods aren't on the table. The only thing that could really be done is to, as a group (with or without the DM, though with will help a great deal) tell him point-blank that he is making the game not fun for all involved, and to either chill the **** out or get kicked out. Tell him that if he finds a non-homebrew method of called shots that the rest of the group is willing to accept, then he can use those. Otherwise, remind him of what HP actually means and that the phrases 'normal' and 'natural' went out the window the instant the words 'RPG' were brought into evidence, and that's ignoring the fact that headshots are far from always lethal even with firearms, let alone arrows.

TL/DR: Give this prick an ultimatum as a group to either quit acting like the kind of ******** that drives friends to tears over a GAME or get the Hell out. If he doesn't take it seriously, bring ordnance (whether this means bats all around or something more interesting I don't care).

[geekintheground]

just gonna pop in to agree with the others. might i suggest you show him this thread? it MIGHT help to see that the internet is on your side (unlikely given what we know, but still). and please do let us know what your group ends up doing and how it works out. i do SO love me some stories

[prufock]

He has played before, but he always left after the first sesion because "it's boring" when he does nothing but odd desicions and insulting the DM calling them "awful DM".

Actually, we've asked him several times if he really has read something relevant, he claims that he has read books like Races of Destiny, Complete Divine and else, but he acts odd when asked about the PHB... He called us (the rest of the party) idiots that don't know how to play the game because he said so, then he wouldn't listen to us...

By the way, he interrupted the DM at every point that wasn't his turn, called the game "boring" several times and yelled at us because we are just bad when he needed OUR help to create up his character because when he got to where we play, he has not any character made up nor an idea of what he was going to play...

I'm going to reiterate my own advice here, because just reading this is getting me worked up.

Remove your DM. Someone else takes over as DM. Invite current DM to be a player. Do not invite asshat problem player.

He has an attitude problem, not a problem with the game. This is not an in-character issue, this is an abrasive self-centred jerk who DOES NOT KNOW THE RULES yet calls you idiots for KNOWING THE RULES. He repeatedly insults and demeans you even though HE is the one in the wrong.

You do not need to play with this guy.

If your current DM objects to this plan because he wants to continue being the DM, tell him to DEAL WITH THE DAMN PROBLEM ALREADY and he can continue. You should not have to put up with this dummy just because he's the DM's friend.

BOOT
HIS
ASS

Okay, I feel better now.

[Ghen]

just gonna pop in to agree with the others. might i suggest you show him this thread? it MIGHT help to see that the internet is on your side (unlikely given what we know, but still). and please do let us know what your group ends up doing and how it works out. i do SO love me some stories

Oh man, I never thought about showing him this thread. I wonder how he would react? I'm gonna guess that he will say we are all idiots who don't know how to play the game or stupid. Maybe he would remove himself from the game, though.

[Andezzar]

Maybe he would remove himself from the game, though.That would solve the problem, wouldn't it?

[hymer]

Oh man, I never thought about showing him this thread. I wonder how he would react? I'm gonna guess that he will say we are all idiots who don't know how to play the game or stupid. Maybe he would remove himself from the game, though.

Just a hunch, but escalating the situation probably won't help. The only way you can keep playing with this guy and have fun is if the situation gets defused or managed somehow. Getting him even more defensive is unlikely to achieve that.
In any case, the DM is key to this situation. He's the one attached (and the one who seems most likely to take it hard if you get the annoying guy to self-detonate socially), and he's the one that's finding it hardest to cope - which makes sense, as he's being pulled in three different directions. If he won't let go of the guy for D&D purposes, and you can't find a way to make things work (which seems unlikely judging from what we have here), you're going to have to stop playing, at least with those two.

[Red Fel]

Oh man, I never thought about showing him this thread. I wonder how he would react? I'm gonna guess that he will say we are all idiots who don't know how to play the game or stupid. Maybe he would remove himself from the game, though.

I... would discourage you from showing him the thread, actually.

First, if he won't listen to the arguments of people he knows in real life, it's highly unlikely he'll hear reason from a bunch of strangers on a web-based forum.

Second, this thread has been more than a bit venomous towards him. Even a reasonable person would feel defensive, even hostile, after reading this, and this person doesn't strike me as the most level-headed individual.

Third, our primary piece of advice has been to boot him. It's been mentioned in almost every post in this thread. If the insults don't put him on the defensive, the fact that you're showing him a thread where virtually everyone is saying you need to eject him (some of us several times) is likely to put him on edge. He's more likely to respond with a proactive argument as to why you can't boot him, saying and provoking harsh statements that leave bad feelings all around.

If you're going to boot him - and you should - be civil about it. Be personable, polite, and don't rely on anyone but yourselves. Don't say things you'll regret, don't leave hurt feelings and don't fling accusations. Just tear off the bandage, close the door, take care of it with finality but with tact.

[geekintheground]

I... would discourage you from showing him the thread, actually.

First, if he won't listen to the arguments of people he knows in real life, it's highly unlikely he'll hear reason from a bunch of strangers on a web-based forum.

Second, this thread has been more than a bit venomous towards him. Even a reasonable person would feel defensive, even hostile, after reading this, and this person doesn't strike me as the most level-headed individual.

Third, our primary piece of advice has been to boot him. It's been mentioned in almost every post in this thread. If the insults don't put him on the defensive, the fact that you're showing him a thread where virtually everyone is saying you need to eject him (some of us several times) is likely to put him on edge. He's more likely to respond with a proactive argument as to why you can't boot him, saying and provoking harsh statements that leave bad feelings all around.

If you're going to boot him - and you should - be civil about it. Be personable, polite, and don't rely on anyone but yourselves. Don't say things you'll regret, don't leave hurt feelings and don't fling accusations. Just tear off the bandage, close the door, take care of it with finality but with tact.

yeah... i kinda rushed forward with that. probably isnt the best idea, sorry. :smalleek::smallredface:

[Ghen]

yeah... i kinda rushed forward with that. probably isnt the best idea, sorry. :smalleek::smallredface:

Sorta my fault too, but don't worry. If bad ideas weren't brought up, they could never be shot down. After considering it more closely, yeah, showing the dude the thread is probably not a great idea.

But showing the DM... on the other hand...

[Yael]

Yeah, I might show this thread to my current DM, actually one of the players is our usual DM, so he might take on the magical seat. Also, next sunday is when we have our next sesion, so we shall decide what to do there.

[Ghen]

Yeah, I might show this thread to my current DM, actually one of the players is our usual DM, so he might take on the magical seat. Also, next sunday is when we have our next sesion, so we shall decide what to do there.

I know everyone's situation is different, but my friends and I usually drive a fair distance to get to one of our games. If this is the case for you, it may be courteous to sort this out with everyone ahead of time so the problem player doesn't get kicked from the game after he drives all the way there. I would at least do him that courtesy, to save his time and gas money.

Of course if he lives next door or something, it's probably best to sort it out with everyone there at the game. Just depends on your situation.

[Yael]

I know everyone's situation is different, but my friends and I usually drive a fair distance to get to one of our games. If this is the case for you, it may be courteous to sort this out with everyone ahead of time so the problem player doesn't get kicked from the game after he drives all the way there. I would at least do him that courtesy, to save his time and gas money.

Of course if he lives next door or something, it's probably best to sort it out with everyone there at the game. Just depends on your situation.

Yeah, about that... He lives like two blocks from the house where we play, and he wasn't going (on past games where he told us he would play) even though his house is so goddamn close... I don't have a car, so using public transport is riculously expensive (I live in Mexico) and if I go that place to play, I WANT to play...

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Let us know how it sorts out, if/when you end up bringing up the problem player's serious attitude problems.

[Yael]

For anyone that is still interested, he didn't show up last sesion. Just like everytime, he goes once, he never returns.

[Swaoeaeieu]

So...
probem solved right?

[Ghen]

For anyone that is still interested, he didn't show up last sesion. Just like everytime, he goes once, he never returns.

Maybe he reads the Giant in the Playground D&D forums XD

[TheIronGolem]

For anyone that is still interested, he didn't show up last sesion. Just like everytime, he goes once, he never returns.

Okay, now stop inviting him to future games. If he finds out and wants to know why, tell him the truth: he obviously isn't enjoying the games since he keeps flaking out, and the rest of you aren't enjoying them when he ruins them with his antics - and since nobody's having fun when he's there, he shouldn't be there.

Remember: bad gaming is worse than no gaming.

[Yael]

Remember: bad gaming is worse than no gaming.

Trueuer words were never spoken.

[eggynack]

Okay, now stop inviting him to future games. If he finds out and wants to know why, tell him the truth: he obviously isn't enjoying the games since he keeps flaking out, and the rest of you aren't enjoying them when he ruins them with his antics - and since nobody's having fun when he's there, he shouldn't be there.
I'd skip the later parts. You can point to not coming to games as an objective and inarguable issue, and as it's not much of a personal flaw, it's less likely to start arguments. By contrast, insulting him personally seems like it'd lead to bad times.

[TheIronGolem]

I'd skip the later parts. You can point to not coming to games as an objective and inarguable issue, and as it's not much of a personal flaw, it's less likely to start arguments. By contrast, insulting him personally seems like it'd lead to bad times.

Hmm? What part of what I said seems like personal insult to you? I suppose you could say that the bit about him not enjoying the games is speculation, but it's well-founded speculation. And in any event, it's not an insult.

The reason I made this suggestion is because sometimes in threads like this, people rightly suggest that the problem player not be invited back to the table, but then they go on to suggest passive-aggressive solutions for avoiding conflict if/when said player finds out the game is going on without him. Things like "make up an excuse as to why he can't play" or "schedule your games for times you know he can't make it", etc. And while I don't think it's right to directly rub the player's expulsion in their face, there's nothing wrong with telling him the truth should he ask for it. Don't be a jerk about it, sure, but also don't sugar-coat it or avoid letting him know about the problems his behavior caused.

[eggynack]

Hmm? What part of what I said seems like personal insult to you? I suppose you could say that the bit about him not enjoying the games is speculation, but it's well-founded speculation. And in any event, it's not an insult.
The part about ruining games with his antics, mostly.


The reason I made this suggestion is because sometimes in threads like this, people rightly suggest that the problem player not be invited back to the table, but then they go on to suggest passive-aggressive solutions for avoiding conflict if/when said player finds out the game is going on without him. Things like "make up an excuse as to why he can't play" or "schedule your games for times you know he can't make it", etc. And while I don't think it's right to directly rub the player's expulsion in their face, there's nothing wrong with telling him the truth should he ask for it. Don't be a jerk about it, sure, but also don't sugar-coat it or avoid letting him know about the problems his behavior caused.

I agree that going passive aggressive is a bad path to go down, but explaining all of the real reasons he's not allowed back in the game, instead of just using the one that's reasonably lacking in conflict, seems to be a bad path to go down. I can see doing that if he doesn't see that explanation as enough, but otherwise you're better off with the plan that leaves everyone reasonably happy.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Lead with the absences, sure, but if pressed you'll have to lay out the grievances.

[eggynack]

Lead with the absences, sure, but if pressed you'll have to lay out the grievances.
Possibly, though there is always just sticking to your guns. There's not necessarily an onus to use perfect honesty here, and while it might feel better to do so, it seems to be a thing with worse possible results.

[Xaroth]

Just because you hit the persons head doesn't mean it's a DIRECT hit. You could catch them in the ear, taking it completely off. That wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. You could catch them through their cheek, dislocating the jaw and hurting like hell...wouldn't kill them but would cause damage. It could take them in the eye but without going through to the brain...painful as all hell but not an instant kill. There could be an argument for auto-killing on a critical for head-shots. But even then I would rule that it is only an auto-kill if you get a crit and a natural 20 on the crit confirmation. Don't know if there are any solid rules for head-shots tho.

Something my DM does is that if you're going for an instant killshot, you have to triple crit.
If you aim for the head and roll within your threat range, but don't confirm, it doesn't do much to their head.
If you roll within your threat and confirm but don't get a nat 20 on the last roll, it's a crit and does its damage, maybe killing and maybe not.
If you roll with your threat, confirm, AND get a nat 20 on the last roll, then boom-shaka-laka-dead.

[XmonkTad]

Yeah, this is an insane troll player who's main goal will be to slaughter everyone without challenge, burn villages to the ground, and urinate on the ashes. They need to meet Tucker's Gelatinous Cubes and a Dracolexi that Power Word: Blinds them. Have them roleplay a blind guy in the middle ages realistically for a while.
Constantly make them lose actions because their shoes are untied. He can't tie them again without a use-rope check.
Make them roleplay eating or their character starves.
Claim the spell "Backbiter" causes him to auto-headshot himself.
If this guy wants realism, make sure it kills him.

[Talya]

Aim for the players head when you throw the DMG. You should be able to take him out in one shot.

[Vedhin]

Aim for the players head when you throw the DMG. You should be able to take him out in one shot.

Not if he Tumbles.

[Andezzar]

Something my DM does is that if you're going for an instant killshot, you have to triple crit.
If you aim for the head and roll within your threat range, but don't confirm, it doesn't do much to their head.
If you roll within your threat and confirm but don't get a nat 20 on the last roll, it's a crit and does its damage, maybe killing and maybe not.
If you roll with your threat, confirm, AND get a nat 20 on the last roll, then boom-shaka-laka-dead.Is that a critical threat and one natural 20 or a threat and two natural 20s? 1-121/400 or 1-121/8000 does not come up often.

1depending on the threat range of the attack.

[aleucard]

Is that a critical threat and one natural 20 or a threat and two natural 20s? 1-121/400 or 1-121/8000 does not come up often.

1depending on the threat range of the attack.

I'd say that he'd need 3 Natural 20s in a row to get an insta-gib, and even then only on things that are open to crits. If he doesn't want to do that, keep beaning him in the head with a foam mallet and asking him if he's dead yet, and remind him of just what exactly HP means.

I'm awaiting to hear the results of our suggestions.

[Xaroth]

Is that a critical threat and one natural 20 or a threat and two natural 20s? 1-121/400 or 1-121/8000 does not come up often.

1depending on the threat range of the attack.

Let's use the ever-famous scimitar as an example.

Roll a d20. If it's an 18-20, then you go to number 2: Confirming it.
Roll a d20. If it's an 18-20, you have confirmed a crit. And now to the third roll: The killshot.
Roll a d20. ONLY IF IT IS A NATURAL 20 do you instakill.

Yeah, the god of luck really needs to be shining on you if you want to instakill.

[Xaroth]

I'd say that he'd need 3 Natural 20s in a row to get an insta-gib, and even then only on things that are open to crits. If he doesn't want to do that, keep beaning him in the head with a foam mallet and asking him if he's dead yet, and remind him of just what exactly HP means.

I'm awaiting to hear the results of our suggestions.

Honestly something I'm going to do to any of my players that piss me off is bring in my 1-20 crit range NPC wielding something different depending on just how much the player pissed me off or what they did to piss me off.

The most likely scenario is that he'll tear the player's arms off, enchant them right in front of him with Aptitude, then use Lightning mace to deal infinite b****slaps with his own hands.

Better yet, enchant them with vorpal and slap his head from his shoulders with his own hands.

Man that'd be fun.

And for the record this is a somewhat homebrew NPC that I only really feel like bringing in for the fear factor (my players are actually scared of every Feral Gargun they see because of what I've told them about this character) but he does have contribution to the story. My players don't know that yet, though.


Anyway, aptitude/vorpal foam mallets sound fun.

[Vedhin]

Honestly something I'm going to do to any of my players that piss me off is bring in my 1-20 crit range NPC wielding something different depending on just how much the player pissed me off or what they did to piss me off.

That could actually be with 3.0 material, IIRC. You start with a Nimblewright, give it Lightning Maces and Disciple of Dispater, and enchant it's rapier-hands to be +1 Keen Aptitude weapons.

[Andezzar]

Let's use the ever-famous scimitar as an example.

Roll a d20. If it's an 18-20, then you go to number 2: Confirming it.
Roll a d20. If it's an 18-20, you have confirmed a crit. And now to the third roll: The killshot.
Roll a d20. ONLY IF IT IS A NATURAL 20 do you instakill.

Yeah, the god of luck really needs to be shining on you if you want to instakill.You do know that normally crits are confirmed with any hit, not just threatening hits?

[Xaroth]

That could actually be with 3.0 material, IIRC. You start with a Nimblewright, give it Lightning Maces and Disciple of Dispater, and enchant it's rapier-hands to be +1 Keen Aptitude weapons.

This is a Feral Gargun.

I don't know what a Nimblewright is, but it doesn't sound like a Feral Gargun.

[Xaroth]

You do know that normally crits are confirmed with any hit, not just threatening hits?

Yeah, but this is killshot rules. It's made that way so it's less likely to be a killshot and actually extend the combat a bit.

[Vedhin]

This is a Feral Gargun.

I don't know what a Nimblewright is, but it doesn't sound like a Feral Gargun.

You said something about using homebrew, so I was offering an alternative. A Nimblewright is a Construct from the MMII. It's sentient, and it's notable for having a 12-20 crit range and getting a free trip with every crit. I also seem to recall it having some nice SLAs.

[Xaroth]

You said something about using homebrew, so I was offering an alternative. A Nimblewright is a Construct from the MMII. It's sentient, and it's notable for having a 12-20 crit range and getting a free trip with every crit. I also seem to recall it having some nice SLAs.

"See you next fall."
*trips*
*head falls off*
"...did I go overboard?"

[emilin_rose]

Alternately, have a monster shoot him in the head and insta-kill him.

But seriously, it sounds like you don't actually have a rules question, you have a 'how do I deal with a problem player' question. I'd suggest having one person sit down with the problem player in a neutral setting (outside the game) and explain what is wrong. If that doesn't work, have the group talk with the player (still outside the game). If that doesn't work, you might need to find a new player.

It sounds more to me like he has a munchkin. and what do we do with munchkins? drop houses on them/hang them from trees/feed them to flying monkeys. As much as it seems petty, kill his character off and have him start from level 1. That'll learn him that rule 1 is what the DM says goes.

[With a box]

lt looks like a thread necromancy, sir

[A Tad Insane]

I got this
TURN UNHEAD!!!


...wait, I think I did it wrong

[ddude987]

Actually its only been 43 days. Tots not necro