The Worst player you've ever had/seen/been/heard of

[Theomniadept]

Did you think that I was gone? Did you think I merely had the worst DM ever? Oh no, now it's time for bad players.

David was different. I'd known him for a long time but this guy had been into tabletop RPGs longer than me. You would think that would make him better at them. His characters were never characters. They were just him. But as a Monk. Or a Rogue, or Inquisitor. But mostly a Monk.

In my first game with him I was playing a simple Dwarven Defender. I was semi-new to 3.5 but knew enough to where I knew I shouldn't powergame with the DM till I knew what I was getting into. Plus he was going to play Monk and I didn't want to showboat. Instead of going Drunken Master or Sacred Fist, he was hell-bent on getting that Ki Strike (Adamantine). In his mind he would rip through steel and destroy everything - in mine, i saw a light weapon making crappy sunder attempts against barbarians with actual strength.

Always remember that a Rules-Lawyer is not a Rules-Enforcer. The Rules-Enforcer wants to play the game as designed or as the DM wishes or with whatever group-approved rules are in place. This is to create a fun game where the static rules allow for actual character creation. David was always trying to argue against the rules. First one came up when he was spotted with like 5 different +2 Strength magic items. Plus, he had thought the Amulet of Mighty Fists gave a Strength bonus. Since his infinite wisdom told him to just outright erase and rewrite his strength score (instead of using base + mods like an intelligent person) when this was caught he basically tried to convince us he had an 18 strength when I clearly remember nobody rolling 18 for strength.

We were playing with Paizo's crit card (not recommending those anytime soon) and this caused the dumbest problem I've ever heard - his Monk couldn't do bleed damage. I had an axe, the Druid had a scimitar, and we had, at some point or another, drawn the 2d6 bleed damage card each. He was arguing (and I mean yelling at the top of his lungs) that he should be able to buy a bunch of cheap +STR items so he could qualify for the Epic Level Feat Vorpal Fist. So he would be able to do slashing damage and thus possibly bleed damage....on a nat 20....if he draws the right card.

Did I mention optimization is so far out of this guy's reach he thought a 2/day custom Rod of Disintegrate was powerful? More on that later.

Once some more players started joining he got made because he was being outshone in every aspect. In a tournament the Sorcerer cast Enervation and caused 3 negative levels and he tried to roll Fort. When it was revealed there's no save he shouted "THAT'S BROKEEEEEN" once again at the top of his lungs.

Let's see; despite having Stunning Fist he has never, ever once used it because "what if I need it later". He yelled at me because I rolled my d20 and d10 at the same time, because "I was assuming I'd hit" (me playing a fighter and trying to save time on dice rolls is apparently bad). Any time he failed a Save-or-Die spell he'd pout, triply so if it took him out of the battle. When a group of terrible players joined us and brought in characters ripped right off the min/max boards without consulting anyone at all we kinda had to switch playstyles - I tried to go Rogue (before the DM started going full-idiot with houserules and believing WBL is optional), then I went VoP Healer/Apostle of Peace. Not powerful but with VoP and magic this DM was outclassed 100%. Our Ranger switched to a Warlock and then later a Drunken Master (who did Monk 10 times better than David ever could), and David....

...went Artificer. You know, the Tier 1 class that requires knowing every magic item in the game to be effective? Yeah, well this is where his turn became 'browse the internet time'. He made himself a +1 Shocking heavy Crossbow. Then took Rapid Reload for it. Let that sink in - his primary method of fighting was to shoot one ineffective bolt, then reload. Later he made the aforementioned Rod of "WHY DOES EVERYTHING MAKE ITS FORTITUDE SAAAAAAAAVE!?!?!?", and in between....nothing. One time he fired his crossbow and rolled a 1 and drew the 'weapon breaks' card. The next round he took a 5 foot step back and began repairing his crossbow. Enemy was literally 5 feet from his face and he was so pissed he decided to throw a fit in-character. Never imbued anyone's armor/clothing, never did anything useful, except what he wanted to do - invent a gun. So once he had his 1d10 gun that hit touch AC and required 2 full rounds to reload (all houseruled) he stopped existing - his turn only came up every 3rd turn so the game progressed a lot faster. We once found a Wand of Polymorph, but after learning he couldn't use it to turn into an Elder Wyrm Dragon he said "Polymorph is f***ing useless".

After this game he went on to other games, but I was always in touch with the people in said games. First, there was his Artificer Redux in a game with the same DM - he always tried to metagame whenever possible (going so far as to memorize the frickin Monster Manuals but then being 100% lost when it comes to Polymorph) so when the DM tried to insert magical artifacts (which said DM did with all the grace of a 500 pound person falling out of a scooter) David would immediately begin probing them for information. There was this gem that was supposed to make whoever touched it slightly greedier with every contact - something to come up muuuuuuch later at an inopportune moment for the players. David destroyed this thing immediately and pissed off the DM.

There were times he was so pissed he would shout and argue with the DM and whine until he would threaten to just give up the DM seat - this led to him angrily slamming the books in front of the DM. Let me be clear - my game with him was filled to the brim with enough awkward moments and silences for a lifetime and from what I heard from my other friends it got WORSE in the next game. In this game characters died a lot (the DM was relatively bad and was always doing Deus Ex Mach - I'm sorry, I meant DM Fiat) and he proudly proclaimed "Who cares, I've got hundreds of characters in reserve", which was yet another two-sided insult to himself. The first being that his characters were never any more than his own shouty attitude combined with some class, the second being that he clearly showed no investment into the game enough to care about said 'characters'. In this same game there was also a moment when he was playing a Dragonfire Adept and would continually 'change' how his breath weapons worked, like saying they lasted X rounds instead of Y. Once someone finally caught this they stopped game, printed out every page of his class, then placed the papers in front of him and said "There, now play your character the way it's supposed to be played".

A couple years later a mutual friend of ours wanted to try DMing. Pathfinder existed at this point and I ended up in a game with him again, with my Sorcerer friend from the previous game as well. And thus we saw the return of the Monk, in all of its ineptitude. At least this time around it had the ability to do SOMETHING rather than waste a turn, so I felt confident playing Summoner wouldn't completely nullify his existence. I still had to deal with that persistent Lawful Ana-I mean Neutral alignment of 'Obey the law or I will threaten you like I'm actually a threat' attitude that pervaded every character of his. Then one of our friends cast Fireball on him, as per his permission, to kill some nymphs, and he said 'I'll make the save!' Natural 1. The DM was not good in any regards because he said that the fireball went nuclear and destroyed all the treasure (The Sorcerer's spell can become more devastating to the environment if his friend is inside and fails a save? What?) and then he came back into the game with his next original character - the Inquisitor.

He has never been more useful than when he FINALLY just had spells to choose from. Never had he contributed more to the party than the day he picked a simplistic class that had built-in idiot-proof abilities. Until the dragon got a critical bite off. Then he died. Then he came back as a Rogue (what).

Once a Rogue he had a simple strategy - use Ring of Invisibility, move up to enemy, make -one- attack, then repeat. Not, go invisible, full attack for sneak attack on all attacks, then repeat, no, he would do one attack every other round. Now, when players get bored of characters at least they try to have an in-game reason for said character swap, and it usually involves a gap in time from the point where they exit and the point where they enter. Not even joking, this is how it happened.

He introduces a bunch of backstory NPCs who are fighting [insert evil regime here]. He is standing at the party wagon and says that he has to go with them, they need his help. Literally, as his one character is walking off-screen his Monk is walking on screen and immediately says he's back and has been reincarnated by Irori because of unfinished business. I want this guy to write a book. No, seriously, I want him to actually write a book and sell it.

In the miscellaneous areas, there was always his character builds - for his Monk he always was wanting to take the Dash feat multiple times for maximum ground mobility. I had to explain you -couldn't- take it multiple times because it does not say you can when he rebutted with his intent to convince the DM to let him throw away his feats in favor of improving his ability to not fly. He was convinced the crab tattoo of the Tattooed Monk class was best because then he wouldn't need to eat, sleep, or drink (because a Magic Bedroll, Everlasting Ration, and Replenishing Skin are just so expensive). When it came to discussions about magic he always asserted Evocation was just the best school ever (to which I pointed out that little thing called Energy Resistance that most every caster can have prepped or that a lot of monsters have or the items you can buy, etc.), he would argue Barbarians should not have any armor proficiencies (apparently everyone in Braveheart was naked), when he played a Wizard (Evocation specialized) in a three-off campaign he spent all his WBL trying to increase AC, then argued that is was 'me playing my character the way I want to' when someone pointed out how infinitely better miss chance was, and in that same game he argued he should cast from his scrolls of blasting spells to preserve his spells per day (gotta burn that coal power so we don't run out of solar energy).

He would spit every time he yelled and it gathered on his unshaven face.

[Inevitability]

Remember S? Yeah, that guy who I talked about earlier? He reached a new level of horribleness yesterday.

According to one of my players, S had stated that I was 'cheating' because I had purchased Hoard of the Dragon Queen (which S coincidentally bought a few days later) to use with the group, and was not giving them the exact amounts of treasure specified in the book. Let that sink in. This guy is upset because he reads the exact adventure we are playing and discovers he has not gotten all the treasure he thinks he should get. C'mon S, it's my adventure and I get to change things if I want to.

[Mr Beer]

That is the clearest request to creatively meta-trap the adventure I have ever heard. Let him pick out the sweetest loot item and then discover it's cursed...not just cursed but super cursed.

[ComaVision]

TL;DR a close friend and rule-zealous veteran player walked out on a session because I wouldn't let him relocate his character during a monster's turn to get advantage on an OA.

Honestly, I think I would have allowed it. The player being ignorant of a rule doesn't mean the character is inept. I'd just add the caveat that I won't allow that kind of correction again. I routinely allow stuff like this for newer players.

[Theomniadept]

This is not me. I did not write this story. But, I feel that in this thread this link belongs here. It was destined to exist here. If I must suffer then everyone else must suffer as well.

WARNING: This link is HEAVILY NSFW. While there are no pictures or videos to offend the language used and the content of this link are not for the meek of heart. Do not read this story if you plan on consuming food within the next 24 hours.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Luke

[BootStrapTommy]

Those stats should appear some stupidly low percentage of the time, so I can except getting angry if they were legitimately rolled (which I doubt), and the GM could have handled it better, but this character seems to be a super-Roy (who to me has 12-14 in everything except STR and INT, which probably both began at 14-16). The character is just so high in terms of raw talent that I wouldn't allow it in a game (whereas I would allow an array of 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18) unless the other players had also rolled really well.

Isn't Vaarsuvius stated to have 18 Int in the comic with the mind flayer? Roy's is implied to be higher.

Honestly, I think I would have allowed it. The player being ignorant of a rule doesn't mean the character is inept. I'd just add the caveat that I won't allow that kind of correction again. I routinely allow stuff like this for newer players. Since it was rooted in him misunderstanding flanking, I couldn't. He's a veteran of AD&D. Flanking hasn't changed since 3e. So he had no excuse to make that mistake then tell me "Well flanking rules must have changed." after playing that many years. I expected better of him.

Though given hindsight, capitulating would have been the least painful thing to do.

[BeerMug Paladin]

Isn't Vaarsuvius stated to have 18 Int in the comic with the mind flayer? Roy's is implied to be higher.

I always interpreted that to mean that Roy's Int+Wis+Cha is higher than V's. I always thought they were tied on Int, though.

[Cazero]

Isn't Vaarsuvius stated to have 18 Int in the comic with the mind flayer? Roy's is implied to be higher.

No, Roy is not implied to have higher INT. It's just that sometimes, you're not really in the mood for a hamburger and just want a big piece of meat without extras.
edited : remembering the comic badly makes bad metaphors

[Platymus Pus]

Recently a member of my group has been pushing the limits of what I and my players consider decent.

For instant she threw her character at one of the PCs in a very forceful way. More recently her character switch gods when said god offered her boons. The other party cleric didn't. To which she responded when they took a long rest that she was going to cut off a part of his anatomy in his sleep. We half heartedly chuckled, but then she messaged me during wrap up(5 mins after the incident) that she will RP the character how she wants to.

To which I responded that I didn't care if her character was willing to disfigure another PC.

She didn't remember that she had ever said she wanted to attack the other PC. She had sent that message about RPing her character the way she wanted because of another game event that happened earlier in the game.

It was really weird because the entire party heard she wanted to disfigure one of the players, but she didn't remember saying it. It wasn't until her boyfriend who was in the room said she said it did she actually believe she did. Even then she gave one of those half hearted apologizes because she still didn't think she did it.

She is still in my group.

I know this post is old, but I recommend a doctor's visit for that woman.

[Sith_Happens]

Also, if you have the right feats (at least in D&D 4e), you can set the fire elemental on (more?) fire.

3.5 also has such a feat. It's rather popular.:smallwink:


I know about the worst DM ever (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?23784-I-think-I-just-dealt-with-the-worst-gaming-session), but player? Not sure...

Yeah... No. Lanky Bugger's DM was about as horrible as it gets, yes, but mostly in ways tangentially related to DMing at most. THIS (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?275152-What-am-I-supposed-to-do) is the worst DM ever.

[Septimus Faber]

Yeah... No. Lanky Bugger's DM was about as horrible as it gets, yes, but mostly in ways tangentially related to DMing at most. THIS (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?275152-What-am-I-supposed-to-do) is the worst DM ever.

Basically. But I don't think you'd know about that.

[Anonymouswizard]

Basically. But I don't think you'd know about that.

Oh know, you knew that when you were doing X, but now I'm ruling that you never knew in the first place.

[Solaris]

Yeah... No. Lanky Bugger's DM was about as horrible as it gets, yes, but mostly in ways tangentially related to DMing at most. THIS (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?275152-What-am-I-supposed-to-do) is the worst DM ever.

You're basically wrong about that. Chief Circle is what all DMs should aspire to be. His dual-wielding katana self-insert is the epitome of DMPC characterization and his empire is basically the pinnacle of what is possible using superhuman intelligence. You just don't understand because you're still basically limited to just a human intellect.

[(Un)Inspired]

You're basically wrong about that. Chief Circle is what all DMs should aspire to be. His dual-wielding katana self-insert is the epitome of DMPC characterization and his empire is basically the pinnacle of what is possible using superhuman intelligence. You just don't understand because you're still basically limited to just a human intellect.

Do you ever wonder if he's still running games in his Authyr Universe thing?

[Feddlefew]

You're basically wrong about that. Chief Circle is what all DMs should aspire to be. His dual-wielding katana self-insert is the epitome of DMPC characterization and his empire is basically the pinnacle of what is possible using superhuman intelligence. You just don't understand because you're still basically limited to just a human intellect.

I fixed that for you. :smalltongue:

[Solaris]

Do you ever wonder if he's still running games in his Authyr Universe thing?

With or without players.
Player-free gaming isn't my preference, it's just basically superior. Characters make the most optimal choices that way and we don't have any... difficulties (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/10/suethulu-basically-end.html).


I fixed that for you. :smalltongue:

Much obliged.

[Milodiah]

Nope, this is too much. Internet over. (http://xkcd.com/1454/)

[ReaderAt2046]

Do you ever wonder if he's still running games in his Authyr Universe thing?

Actually, Trekkin mentions that after he posted this (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/10/suethulu-basically-end.html), CC never ran another game in that setting.

[(Un)Inspired]

Actually, Trekkin mentions that after he posted this (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/10/suethulu-basically-end.html), CC never ran another game in that setting.

Poor guy. I know it was a dreadful system and he was inept as a DM but it always sounded to me like the guy didn't really have anything else going for him in his life.

[Kish]

Considering we're talking "women take Wisdom damage when their breasts are damaged" levels of sexism and "The (Star Wars) Empire is almost the ideal government, yes, blowing up an inhabited planet to establish your power is totally the best approach, but bleh, who let the cyborg in, kill him off?" levels of ableism, my ability to sympathize with Chief Circle may well be dead, and should it ever show signs of life, it takes 60d100 damage from my glancing at this (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/09/suethulu-jin-down.html).

Indeed, he was the worst GM.

[BootStrapTommy]

Considering we're talking "women take Wisdom damage when their breasts are damaged" levels of sexism and... Wait, what?

[BeerMug Paladin]

What is being referred to is right here (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/08/suethulu-marty-is-bad-human_10.html).

[Sith_Happens]

Actually, Trekkin mentions that after he posted this (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/10/suethulu-basically-end.html), CC never ran another game in that setting.

...As far as Trekkin knows.

[Solaris]

Poor guy. I know it was a dreadful system and he was inept as a DM but it always sounded to me like the guy didn't really have anything else going for him in his life.

I'm perfectly okay with that.
The reason Chief Circle didn't really have anything else going for him in his life is because he's basically a horrible human being. I used to work with professional killers and government spooks artillerymen, UAS operators, and military intelligence, and even I find CC pretty damn crappy.


...As far as Trekkin knows.

It's bad when I go to post something and see that someone else has already posted it pretty much word-for-word.

[Feddlefew]

Didn't Trekkin post a few things about having CC as a player? Like that Deadlands character that was Stupid Evil, with the emphasis on Stupid?

[Ravian]

I always interpreted that to mean that Roy's Int+Wis+Cha is higher than V's. I always thought they were tied on Int, though.

Yeah the way I interpreted that was the Intelligence is relative amount (the higher it is the more brain is there to eat) Charisma is sweetness/somewhat tastiness. That's why Elan is essentially Diet Coke, and Haley is a sundae. Wisdom is how healthy it is for you. (Durkon is a bland gruel, and V is a fattening burger. Roy gets high in both intel and wisdom (with above average but not spectacular charisma) so he's a filling and delicious turkey.

Belkar is of course flavored by his overall anger (while at the same time being very bad for you, due to his bad wisdom) so he's a taco.

This has been an unnecessarily over-extensive analysis of a joke strip for your entertainment. :smallwink:

[icefractal]

Given V's relentless non-preparation of basic spells that would be really quite useful, I'm entirely willing to believe a less than stellar Intelligence there. :smalltongue: Although I suppose low Wisdom fits that just as well.
(Ok, I know it's not technically D&D any more, so maybe those spells don't even exist. But they did originally.)

[Talakeal]

What is being referred to is right here (http://irolledazero.blogspot.com/2013/08/suethulu-marty-is-bad-human_10.html).

Am I a horrible person if I say I somewhat agree with this? Male or female if someone is disfigured by injury I can easily see a charisma penalty, particularly if it is in a location that is likely to be considered attractive or draw attention. Furthermore I would think most people would suffer some serious mental setbacks if they were disfigured in such a way, although a flat wisdom penalty is a little weird. Imagine if instead of getting your chest blown off if someone was set on fire and looked like Freddy Kreugar and then ask if penalties to charisma or mental stability might be appropriate.

Note that I will say it is weird for a DM to go out of their way to mutilate a character's sexual characteristics. I remember walking out of one game where the DM decided to punish me for daring to play a female character by declaring that the first critical hit to come may way gave me an impromptu mastectomy.

[Sith_Happens]

Am I a horrible person if I say I somewhat agree with this? Male or female if someone is disfigured by injury I can easily see a charisma penalty, particularly if it is in a location that is likely to be considered attractive or draw attention. Furthermore I would think most people would suffer some serious mental setbacks if they were disfigured in such a way, although a flat wisdom penalty is a little weird. Imagine if instead of getting your chest blown off if someone was set on fire and looked like Freddy Kreugar and then ask if penalties to charisma or mental stability might be appropriate.

Trekkin specified in the thread that the character in question was not in fact "most people" in this respect but Marty of course just assumed she was anyways.

[illyahr]

Yeah the way I interpreted that was the Intelligence is relative amount (the higher it is the more brain is there to eat) Charisma is sweetness/somewhat tastiness. That's why Elan is essentially Diet Coke, and Haley is a sundae. Wisdom is how healthy it is for you. (Durkon is a bland gruel, and V is a fattening burger. Roy gets high in both intel and wisdom (with above average but not spectacular charisma) so he's a filling and delicious turkey.

Belkar is of course flavored by his overall anger (while at the same time being very bad for you, due to his bad wisdom) so he's a taco.

This has been an unnecessarily over-extensive analysis of a joke strip for your entertainment. :smallwink:

I thought V was the turkey (overly filling) and Roy was the burger (quick snack, just enough for a meal).

[nedz]

Yeah the way I interpreted that was the Intelligence is relative amount (the higher it is the more brain is there to eat) Charisma is sweetness/somewhat tastiness. That's why Elan is essentially Diet Coke, and Haley is a sundae. Wisdom is how healthy it is for you. (Durkon is a bland gruel, and V is a fattening burger. Roy gets high in both intel and wisdom (with above average but not spectacular charisma) so he's a filling and delicious turkey.

Belkar is of course flavored by his overall anger (while at the same time being very bad for you, due to his bad wisdom) so he's a taco.

This has been an unnecessarily over-extensive analysis of a joke strip for your entertainment. :smallwink:

You forgot the Ranch Dressing. V is a Burger with Ranch Dressing.

[BootStrapTommy]

You forgot the Ranch Dressing. V is a Burger with Ranch Dressing. Ew. No wonder he was looked over.

[Anonymouswizard]

I thought V was the turkey (overly filling) and Roy was the burger (quick snack, just enough for a meal).

No, V is the burger (tasty, but not especially filling and possibly filled with added bulk), while Roy is the turkey (filling, probably far better for you, and with more tasty meat than the less tasty bun and lettuce). (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0031.html)

Also, it's a turkey? I always assumed it as a chicken. That shows me.

[Milodiah]

Don't forget that fluff-wise Mind Flayers enjoy consuming the minds of people with exciting and varied experiences. It discusses in the books that they much prefer people who have strong, emotional memories rather than just pit-raised slaves...they'd prefer moderate stats but free-range meat over technically high quality but factory-farm raised meat, essentially.

[goto124]

Am I a horrible person if I say I somewhat agree with this? Male or female if someone is disfigured by injury I can easily see a charisma penalty, particularly if it is in a location that is likely to be considered attractive or draw attention. Furthermore I would think most people would suffer some serious mental setbacks if they were disfigured in such a way, although a flat wisdom penalty is a little weird. Imagine if instead of getting your chest blown off if someone was set on fire and looked like Freddy Kreugar and then ask if penalties to charisma or mental stability might be appropriate.

Note that I will say it is weird for a DM to go out of their way to mutilate a character's sexual characteristics. I remember walking out of one game where the DM decided to punish me for daring to play a female character by declaring that the first critical hit to come may way gave me an impromptu mastectomy.

1st paragraph: I would rather have it be reflected in the character's RP, as opposed to a mechanical stat penalty. Everyone treats such events in very different manners anyway, and it's best represented by how the player would play it out.

2nd paragraph: Agreed.

[Marlowe]

"Our group has G.

G always plays a Fighter. Because Fighters Fight. And no other character class can Fight. And real men Fight. And G is a real man. So he plays a Fighter.

Sometimes he has Rogue or Ranger levels. Because then he can have two weapons and Fight twice as much. And/or have Sneak Attack so he can Sneak Attack when he Fights. But they are all still basically Fighters.

He does not understand Power Attack and does not take it; because how can you Fight if you are reducing your attack? He says.

Gs idea of a good Fighter is 2-weapon fighting, weapon focus (light flail), weapon specialisation (light flail), weapon focus (sling). Slings are good for Fighting, because you can add your strength, he says.

Gs idea of beginning an encounter is always to charge, without checking whether the other lot are hostile, aware of us, or even corporeal. Because how can you Fight without charging?

Gs usual position about round 3 of an encounter is flat on his back in a bloodied/strength damaged heap, complaining that nobody told him a level 6 Ogre Barbarian can do lots of damage, or that ghosts can't be hurt with mundane weapons.

Gs tactic when we confront something that he understands can Fight better than him is to sling a few stones, then retreat and let someone else do the Fighting.

G likes to run off on his own and attempt to "flank" (move around and attack from a different side from the rest of the party for no clear reason) large groups of enemies, then cannot understand why his attempts at stealth fail when he has a substantial Armour Check Penalty, no great Dex (G does not seem to realize that 2-weapon fighting has a dex requirement), not many ranks in Move Silently, and a dozen listen checks to beat.

G loves to interrupt the DM in the middle of descriptions to tell us what he is going to do, then gets angry and confused when he steps into a trap or monster that the DM was trying to tell him about. He appears to resent other players getting to ask the DM questions or their characters receiving any focus, and can hold up a session for a good half-hour monopolizing the DM with his own queries while shutting down the other players with a stream of "Just a minute here...give me a minute...just give me a minute here...just give me a minute."

Gs characters like to drink and gamble. Because that's what Real Men do when they are not Fighting. So G will like to waste another half-hour each session with a mini-game of his own where he role-plays gambling with NPC tavern-patrons. Generally, without asking permission to join their party. This will usually led to him getting poisoned and robbed.

G will blame everyone but himself when he suffers consequences for any of the above actions, and treat the healing he receives afterwards as his god-given right. Even screaming for healing while the Cleric is surrounded by Orcs that G himself brought down on us by attacking prematurely.

G keeps his character sheets on the back of crumbled supermarket receipts, and will always put skill ranks into Handle Animal for some reason that escapes us.

G will interrupt any attempt at giving him advice on how to play so he isn't a constant ongoing disaster for his team with the well-worn phrase; "I don't sweat the fiddly details I just like to get stuck in and Fight".

G has been playing D&D for almost 30 years now.

Sweet Dreams. "

Just as a little update;

G is currently playing a Fighter 2/Bard 1. Levels taken in that order "So I can have some hit points" he says. His feats are Weapon Proficiency (Heavy Repeating Crossbow), Rapid Reload (Heavy Repeating Crossbow), Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot and (I think) Extra Music.

He refers to his character without irony as "the front-line fighter", while standing at the back shooting for 1d10 damage per round.

He is constantly confused about Bardic abilities; he thinks that Extra Music lets him cast spells, and that Bardic Knowledge is a skill that you have to put ranks into. In the last session, we discovered that that though he'd put ranks into three different Perform skills, he doesn't have enough ranks in any one of them to use ANY Bardic Music abilities.

He also threw a tantrum in the same session when he started a fistfight with some armed watchmen and was told they'd be getting AoOs on him because he didn't have Improved Unarmed Strike. Apparently, this was news to him. He described it was "ridiculous" and "Just stupid".

The rest of the party consists of a Warblade, a Barbarian/Warlock (basic PHBI Barb/Complete Arcane Sniper warlock, NOT some Pounce-Eldritch Claw wolverine type), and a Cleric of Ehlonna. He has become aware that he is getting outshone in combat. and has stated that as "A skilled warrior", then by rights he should be better in combat than whatever the rest of us are. I should note he's hazy on what the Warblade is. He assumed she was a spellcaster for a few sessions.

He is, I should mention, an excellent party Loonie. The rest of us can just leave his character to wander around for a few minutes and we can rely on him causing a pointless fight or stepping into a giant puddle of trouble that the rest of us can take a grim satisfaction in cleaning up. The trouble is he doesn't see himself as the loonie. He thinks he's the Real Man. And that demanding money from NPC officials, threatening guardsmen, and crashing stranger's card games are things that REAL MEN should be able to do without getting arrested, beaten up, swindled or poisoned.

[Solaris]

G has some interesting ideas as to what constitutes a "Real Man".
Think he's overcompensating for inadequacies in his real life?

[Anonymouswizard]

"Our group has G.

G always plays a Fighter. Because Fighters Fight. And no other character class can Fight. And real men Fight. And G is a real man. So he plays a Fighter.

Sometimes he has Rogue or Ranger levels. Because then he can have two weapons and Fight twice as much. And/or have Sneak Attack so he can Sneak Attack when he Fights. But they are all still basically Fighters.

He does not understand Power Attack and does not take it; because how can you Fight if you are reducing your attack? He says.

Gs idea of a good Fighter is 2-weapon fighting, weapon focus (light flail), weapon specialisation (light flail), weapon focus (sling). Slings are good for Fighting, because you can add your strength, he says.

Gs idea of beginning an encounter is always to charge, without checking whether the other lot are hostile, aware of us, or even corporeal. Because how can you Fight without charging?

Gs usual position about round 3 of an encounter is flat on his back in a bloodied/strength damaged heap, complaining that nobody told him a level 6 Ogre Barbarian can do lots of damage, or that ghosts can't be hurt with mundane weapons.

Gs tactic when we confront something that he understands can Fight better than him is to sling a few stones, then retreat and let someone else do the Fighting.

G likes to run off on his own and attempt to "flank" (move around and attack from a different side from the rest of the party for no clear reason) large groups of enemies, then cannot understand why his attempts at stealth fail when he has a substantial Armour Check Penalty, no great Dex (G does not seem to realize that 2-weapon fighting has a dex requirement), not many ranks in Move Silently, and a dozen listen checks to beat.

G loves to interrupt the DM in the middle of descriptions to tell us what he is going to do, then gets angry and confused when he steps into a trap or monster that the DM was trying to tell him about. He appears to resent other players getting to ask the DM questions or their characters receiving any focus, and can hold up a session for a good half-hour monopolizing the DM with his own queries while shutting down the other players with a stream of "Just a minute here...give me a minute...just give me a minute here...just give me a minute."

Gs characters like to drink and gamble. Because that's what Real Men do when they are not Fighting. So G will like to waste another half-hour each session with a mini-game of his own where he role-plays gambling with NPC tavern-patrons. Generally, without asking permission to join their party. This will usually led to him getting poisoned and robbed.

G will blame everyone but himself when he suffers consequences for any of the above actions, and treat the healing he receives afterwards as his god-given right. Even screaming for healing while the Cleric is surrounded by Orcs that G himself brought down on us by attacking prematurely.

G keeps his character sheets on the back of crumbled supermarket receipts, and will always put skill ranks into Handle Animal for some reason that escapes us.

G will interrupt any attempt at giving him advice on how to play so he isn't a constant ongoing disaster for his team with the well-worn phrase; "I don't sweat the fiddly details I just like to get stuck in and Fight".

G has been playing D&D for almost 30 years now.

Sweet Dreams. "

Just as a little update;

G is currently playing a Fighter 2/Bard 1. Levels taken in that order "So I can have some hit points" he says. His feats are Weapon Proficiency (Heavy Repeating Crossbow), Rapid Reload (Heavy Repeating Crossbow), Point-Blank Shot, Precise Shot and (I think) Extra Music.

He refers to his character without irony as "the front-line fighter", while standing at the back shooting for 1d10 damage per round.

He is constantly confused about Bardic abilities; he thinks that Extra Music lets him cast spells, and that Bardic Knowledge is a skill that you have to put ranks into. In the last session, we discovered that that though he'd put ranks into three different Perform skills, he doesn't have enough ranks in any one of them to use ANY Bardic Music abilities.

He also threw a tantrum in the same session when he started a fistfight with some armed watchmen and was told they'd be getting AoOs on him because he didn't have Improved Unarmed Strike. Apparently, this was news to him. He described it was "ridiculous" and "Just stupid".

The rest of the party consists of a Warblade, a Barbarian/Warlock (basic PHBI Barb/Complete Arcane Sniper warlock, NOT some Pounce-Eldritch Claw wolverine type), and a Cleric of Ehlonna. He has become aware that he is getting outshone in combat. and has stated that as "A skilled warrior", then by rights he should be better in combat than whatever the rest of us are. I should note he's hazy on what the Warblade is. He assumed she was a spellcaster for a few sessions.

He is, I should mention, an excellent party Loonie. The rest of us can just leave his character to wander around for a few minutes and we can rely on him causing a pointless fight or stepping into a giant puddle of trouble that the rest of us can take a grim satisfaction in cleaning up. The trouble is he doesn't see himself as the loonie. He thinks he's the Real Man. And that demanding money from NPC officials, threatening guardsmen, and crashing stranger's card games are things that REAL MEN should be able to do without getting arrested, beaten up, swindled or poisoned.

I'd love to see what he does in any system apart from D&D. I'd assume that as long as you were pink mohawking he'd be great in Shadowrun, but he sounds a lot like someone in my current group who is a great player, as long as you're playing D&D. So far his list of transgressions includes:

-building a character ridiculously good at fighting and sneaking by doing something illegal. Then complaining that he barely had enough skill points to feel competent. Bare in mind that he's in a group of people playing competent characters with at least 30 less skill points, and with more broad skill bases.
-trying to argue that characters aren't durable enough, when he managed to tank two sniper rifle shots and an assault rifle shot. Bare in mind that armour had been weakened from the initial draft to make characters more squishy.
-making a combat focused character in an investigation based game. This isn't actually a problem, as he's good enough at optimising that this isn't a major problem.

It feels wrong when I can say that the worst player in my current group has none nothing worse than misread a rule and misunderstand the genre. Please do not consider this person (V) an entry on this list, G just reminded me of him.

G sounds very much like he'd benefit from playing 4e, from what I hear essentials provides some very good options for simple characters who fight well. Other than that or going back to AD&D I can't see how roleplaying is particularly good for him. If you can get him to a point where he's playing a character who isn't the load though, I have a feeling that he'll become one of the best players in the game (but not the best, that goes to someone with better acting).

[Sith_Happens]

G sounds very much like he'd benefit from playing 4e

HA, good one. No, this is definitely the guy who would neither know nor care what the "Defender" tag on 4e's Fighter class means, choose powers based solely on how much damage they deal, and then only ever use basic attacks anyways.

[Ceiling_Squid]

HA, good one. No, this is definitely the guy who would neither know nor care what the "Defender" tag on 4e's Fighter class means, choose powers based solely on how much damage they deal, and then only ever use basic attacks anyways.

To be fair, a fighter can most certainly be built to do damage rather than be straight-jacketed into the defender role.

Not that it sounds like he would set it up properly.

[Ravian]

HA, good one. No, this is definitely the guy who would neither know nor care what the "Defender" tag on 4e's Fighter class means, choose powers based solely on how much damage they deal, and then only ever use basic attacks anyways.

I got out of 4e before I really had much experience in essentials, but I believe there is a slayer fighter that is essentially made to be a "fighting guy". Striker role, uses big weapons, and just has stances to buff their basic attacks. (whether he would actually use said stances is another matter though). Still I think it was literally designed for players who never want to consider anything beyond hitting a guy really hard.

Still with a base line fighter he'd definitely fail in that role. Actually a lot of defenders in 4e actually function well as secondary controllers (a role shared by Wizards of all classes), since many have powers specifically geared for tying up as many enemies as possible so that they'll focus on him instead of the squishier party members.

In other words, he'd actually have to pay close attention to positioning and maximizing his threat range and marking powers instead of just hitting a guy with a big sword.

How does he feel about Barbarians? They're pretty manly, and can really focus on their striker role without being overly squishy. (Heck you could even take some armor proficiency for heavier stuff if you don't mind wasting a class feature.

[Marlowe]

I think you guys missed something.

Gs current character spends his combat rounds shooting once for 1d10 damage. And he spent four feats to be able to do that.

His last one dual-wielded light flails.

He doesn't understand Power Attack, and thought that "Weapon Focus: Sling" was a good feat. He doesn't understand how iterative attacks work. He confuses Will Save and Spell Resistance. As of 2015, we frequently have to tell him that 2nd Edition rules don't apply any more.

No dudes; he's TERRIBLE at making combat characters. In spite of having played for 30 years or so, he has no analytical grasp of the system whatsoever and he simply does not get what feats do useful things and what doesn't. However, he believes that as he is the Fighter; he should be better in combat than everyone else without any attempt on his part to build or act toward competence. He can not, however, play anything else. He doesn't seem to understand the game beyond "I roll dice to hit things".

Barbarians he despises because they are not "skilled warriors". BTW.

[Sith_Happens]

I believe there is a slayer fighter that is essentially made to be a "fighting guy". Striker role, uses big weapons, and just has stances to buff their basic attacks.

The problem there is that it's called something other than "Fighter" and, as described so far, G only plays Fighters, because obviously the Fighter is the only class designed for fighting. On which note, I'm also guessing, Pelor help you if you make the mistake of trying to convince him to ever use his own healing surges. Yes, even out of combat. Healing people is the Cleric's job.

...That was literally painful to type.

[Anonymouswizard]

This is why I suggested 4e with essentials. The Slayer fighter is a skilled warrior, but as a REAL MANTM he doesn't bother himself with such stupid things as roles or powers, the just grabs his stick of choice and goes to town. Please ignore all this silly stuff about stances, the slayer is a REAL MANTM and so doesn't need such things as class abilities to be a skilled and effective warrior.

Please note I do not actually own essentials, as I've never had the chance to actually play 4e, but I've looked at the classes and they are about as simple as a 3.X fighter. For all the REAL MENTM out there.

[Boost]

Oooh, one of my oldest players does a lot of the "I'm X class, but I will never use the features of said class."


I knew a player whose first character ever was a fighter/barbarian/bear warrior. He only knew how to play brute melee and grappling. Then he made a rogue, but had no idea how to use stealth or ambush tactics. His idea of playing a rogue was "activate my ring of invisibility, use invisibility to sneak attack, repeat." Same player later made a wizard, but would only use his magic to animate undead and cast summon undead spells, so he had a bunch of brute melee creatures to fight with. When he was faced with an enemy he couldn't beat by swarming them with undead, he failed miserably, because he didn't know any other way to use his wizard.

[Marlowe]

This is why I suggested 4e with essentials. The Slayer fighter is a skilled warrior, but as a REAL MANTM he doesn't bother himself with such stupid things as roles or powers, the just grabs his stick of choice and goes to town. Please ignore all this silly stuff about stances, the slayer is a REAL MANTM and so doesn't need such things as class abilities to be a skilled and effective warrior.

Please note I do not actually own essentials, as I've never had the chance to actually play 4e, but I've looked at the classes and they are about as simple as a 3.X fighter. For all the REAL MENTM out there.

Sorry, but you keep talking about people who can understand the game enough to build and use something that's useful in a fight. And I'm talking about G. Not the same thing.

I was in Korea "The time" that the group played 4e. Apparently it did not go well, and nobody wants to touch 4e again.

[Anonymouswizard]

Sorry, but you keep talking about people who can understand the game enough to build and use something that's useful in a fight. And I'm talking about G. Not the same thing.

I was in Korea "The time" that the group played 4e. Apparently it did not go well, and nobody wants to touch 4e again.

Sorry, I must be overestimating G's intelligence. Does he understand what 'this class focuses on making very powerful hits with his weapon. He doesn't have to do anything else in combat but pick the enemy he wants to whack and whack it.'

If that's beyond him then I'm sorry, the only player I've known who seems to have the exact same goal as G can actually build a character. He'll just a) refuse to build a useful wizard because 'if I'm playing a wizard it's to get the blasty spells' then get's annoyed when a semi-optimised fighter gets in the way of his spells.

:durkon: "It's called 'melee', ye daft elf!!" is entirely appropriate in this case.

My reasoning goes: G sounds like someone who can spell his own name and do basic maths. This means he must be able to add up the results of his build choices (which may be the flaw in my logic here) to get accurate attack, damage, and defences. However, basic algebra seems to be beyond him. Thus he may be a decent contributor if given a class that doesn't have to make decisions such as 'power attack or not power attack' while the rest of the group can play essentials or AEDU characters as they see fit. I do not expect him to make competent build choices, and so suggested a system with a smaller gap between low op and high op.

I can see why a bad experience might make someone not want to touch a game though. How much are we limited to D&D? Because my next suggestion would be to try Mutants and Masterminds, except that it's classless and I'm assuming that G would be lost without a fighter class. I know I probably wouldn't be playing with him at this point though.

[Sith_Happens]

Does he understand what 'this class focuses on making very powerful hits with his weapon. He doesn't have to do anything else in combat but pick the enemy he wants to whack and whack it.'

Considering that his idea of "very powerful hits" is inclusive of "crossbow..."

[YossarianLives]

Barbarians he despises because they are not "skilled warriors". BTW.
Reading that sentence makes my head hurt.

[Marlowe]

G can add up his attack roll and his attack bonus. And he knows that the total has to beat the enemies armour class. Sometimes he forgets to add his strength. He didn't know (after 15 years of 3rd edition) what BAB meant. He gets confused if he has to differentiate between "Attack" and "Damage".

He is impressed by the Warlocks 1d6 Eldritch Blast but admits to "Still struggling to get my head around this "touch attack" thing."

He's asked me a few times what Inspire Courage actually does because Plus Something to Attack and Damage Rolls is apparently a bit of a poser to him. Plus, as I mentioned before (and which was kind of the final straw that made me need a bit of a rant) he didn't bother to place his skill ranks in places where he could actually use it.

Bear in mind that this character is his notion of trying something new. This is how he thinks a Bard should be built.

He's a real demon for keeping inventory and tracking mundane gear. In fact, he spends a lot of time reading books of feats and equipment for things that might be useful. Especially if they're out-of-date. What he doesn't do is read the actual rules.

He won't play any class that's not in the Player's handbook. Because they're "Gay".

I showed him a run-down on class Tiers once, in order to help make the point that just because somethings in the Players handbook doesn't mean it's better balanced than something in a splat. His response was. "I see. Every party needs a Cleric.".

For completeness, I did use to play with him a lot in Chivalry and Sorcery. We didn't have as many mechanical difficulties. That's because the DM had been specializing in C&S for years and dealt with all the crunch himself. We did get the same issues of provoking unnecessary trouble and excitement followed by him blaming the mess on everyone but himself.

[Sith_Happens]

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/answers/1751000/1751220_1310674373273.56res_312_162.jpg

[Anonymouswizard]

G can add up his attack roll and his attack bonus. And he knows that the total has to beat the enemies armour class. Sometimes he forgets to add his strength. He didn't know (after 15 years of 3rd edition) what BAB meant. He gets confused if he has to differentiate between "Attack" and "Damage".

He is impressed by the Warlocks 1d6 Eldritch Blast but admits to "Still struggling to get my head around this "touch attack" thing."

He's asked me a few times what Inspire Courage actually does because Plus Something to Attack and Damage Rolls is apparently a bit of a poser to him. Plus, as I mentioned before (and which was kind of the final straw that made me need a bit of a rant) he didn't bother to place his skill ranks in places where he could actually use it.

Bear in mind that this character is his notion of trying something new. This is how he thinks a Bard should be built.

You have just described my worst nightmare :smalleek: I really do not know why anyone is still playing with him, despite him sounding like a great looney. I've never known anyone to be so bad with the rules.


He's a real demon for keeping inventory and tracking mundane gear. In fact, he spends a lot of time reading books of feats and equipment for things that might be useful. Especially if they're out-of-date. What he doesn't do is read the actual rules.

He won't play any class that's not in the Player's handbook. Because they're "Gay".

Has he ever meaningfully interacted with someone who's LGBT? What gives him the right to use that as an insult? He'd have been out of my circle of friends at the drop of a hat :smalleek:


I showed him a run-down on class Tiers once, in order to help make the point that just because somethings in the Players handbook doesn't mean it's better balanced than something in a splat. His response was. "I see. Every party needs a Cleric.".

For completeness, I did use to play with him a lot in Chivalry and Sorcery. We didn't have as many mechanical difficulties. That's because the DM had been specializing in C&S for years and dealt with all the crunch himself. We did get the same issues of provoking unnecessary trouble and excitement followed by him blaming the mess on everyone but himself.

So he can't understand something clearly spelt out? This makes me wonder if he's just using the game as an 'acceptable outlet for violence'. And he's fine as long as someone else handles the crunch? How bearable was he in the C&S games? was there any real difference?

[goto124]

Someone else handling the crunch. That's like... playing a computer game I guess? I won't be surprised if he plays the easier end of games. It's just pick up and play, with no one to judge you for being that bad at game mechanics.

His RP didn't seem terribly good though.

[Marlowe]

C&S can be QUITE detailed, more detailed than either of us had enough time to get to grips with. The DM was very good at immersive storytelling and improv, so it worked out OK.

I would say that in C&S he showed a similar pattern of vicariously indulging in REAL MEN's pursuits like petty violence, thievery, and jerkassery while being unwilling to face consequences for them, or more precisely, loudly protesting that there should even be consequences. I once got his character hung, drawn, and quartered. I didn't feel that ashamed.

In real life, he once got a restraining order put on him after less than 24 hours in town. And we once had to arrange for his discrete escape from Sweden.

[Acacia OnnaStik]

In real life, he once got a restraining order put on him after less than 24 hours in town. And we once had to arrange for his discrete escape from Sweden.

Never mind gaming with him, why do you still associate with this guy? The reasonable approach would be to run in the other direction at the sight of him!

[Feddlefew]

And we once had to arrange for his discrete escape from Sweden.
If I didn't know this was IRL I would want to hear more about this. It is clearly the elevator pitch for an amazing IC story.

[IZ42]

If that's beyond him then I'm sorry, the only player I've known who seems to have the exact same goal as G can actually build a character. He'll just a) refuse to build a useful wizard because 'if I'm playing a wizard it's to get the blasty spells' then get's annoyed when a semi-optimised fighter gets in the way of his spells.

Late and mildly off topic, but I love doing battlefield control with copious amounts of fire applied to enemy's faces!

And for the topic at hand, how much does this story involve meatballs?

[Thanatos 51-50]

Shadowrun, Fifth Edition
The player has an odd, overpowering love for playing hackers and technomancers, and wizards if the setting doesn't allow for hacking. That's fine. He has a preferance, and nobody faulted the individual we'll call "P" for his choice to roll up a Technomancer. "We're all new to this system", we remind him "It's going to be on you to read up on the Matrix rules and know them backwards and forwards, the GM will, too, but you really need to know how your stuff works"
It was the fourth session before he learned what attributes correspond to which aspects of his Living Persona. I doubt he ever really learned the basic rules for hacking, and what most possible actions were.
To a degree, that's fine. There's a lot of rules regarding the Matrix, they can get snarly and confusing, and the GM had a habit of simply "giving" the Technomancer simple hacks during the legwork and planning phase of 'runs, which created an odd dissonance when the drek hit the air circulation device and suddenly P spent five minutes per combat pass leafing through the Matrix rules trying to figure out what he could do, and then failing spectacularly on pretty much everything.

This is fine to a degree. Like I said, we were all new to the system, and we had all made a few mistakes in creating our characters, and learning their limits and abilities. But everybody else sat down and learned their roles and improved how their characters functioned in their rolls.
I read up on the Matrix rules myself and gently provided him some tips on how to improve how he interacted with the world and hacked. Told him to keep an eye on learning how to compile Sprites with better stats than he did -- a Technomancer's one major advantage over Deckers. Told him that an easy, low-cost way to improve his abilities was to buy a specialization during our copious amounts of downtime. He refused and, when I told him so (it was he who broached the subject first), looked like he was about to hit me, so I found a reason to leave the room.

He wouldn't take an action without input from literally every other player at the table and would often zone out in the middle of combat or intricate planning sessions. When the other players are probing contacts for information about the target or the mission, P would sit off to the side, idly checking his phone or, one the occasions we played over at his place (Which was often, he had the best set-up for a game), he would often be furiously studying whatever was on his Facebook page. More than a couple of times, we caught him sleeping. Classic hallmarks of a disinterested player. So the GM took him aside and asked how he could help engage him in the game.
P shrugged, and said everything was fine.
Nevertheless, we found ourselves getting invested in more and more Matrix-heavy runs and scenarios, where having a good Matrix specialist was the lynchpin of our operation. The GM would repeatedly stop everybody else from planning and turn to P to ask him what he wanted to do. What P wanted to research, he even offered advice on what would be good angles to look into. Invariably, P's response would be "Yeah, that sounds fine. Let's look into that.". There was a couple of times where the team only barely survived because our combat monster began heavily investing in their Decker skills.

Gods forbid, however, if a session had to be canceled because of a real-life emergency, though. P would be absolutely furious and rant and rave at all the other players, showing the hallmarks of a player who was too into the game.
The GM and literally every other player would often drop whatever they were doing and try to drag P's focus into (or back into) the game, where he would also explode at us, claiming everything was perfectly fine and he was paying perfect attention to the game, only to ask a couple of minutes later what, exactly, we were hired to do again and what was my plan (I was playing the team's de facto leader).

At a few points in the cmpaign, P actually surprised us in a planning session to overcome a minor obstacle (At one point we were trying to move something heavy [Its weight was measured in metric tonnes] that our Awakened characters wouldn't touch because it ate Essence and we didn't have any heavy lifting equipment.) and said "Guys, I got it, don't worry. I have a plan." So we trusted him. At the very least, he was now actively engaged and thinking and problem-solving. We get to the scene of the crime, and gather 'round.
"Okay, P" we would say "Tell us what you got. What do you want us to do?"
P smiles "Oh, I didn't have a plan, I just wanted you all to shut up.".

While he wasn't actively disrupting the campaign, he would passively drag the group down and make play sessions just a little bit more unbearable, until eventually, the group finally just broke up.
He was (and is, currently, as this was all very recent) infuriated and is currently refusing to even talk to the half of the group he doesn't live with and refuses to even begin to comprehend what a destructive force he was being.

[Fiery Diamond]

I don't have any really bad stories. I do have two players who decided thieving from other party members (or doing the equivalent) was an okay thing to do, however.

Player A (for assassin) was a CN (actually mild CE, but I had forbidden evil characters. He did a good job for the most part and his disruptions never caused OOC problems, so I let him anyway) halfling rogue/assassin. His character introduction involved trying to mug the 6 foot tall human sorcerer in an alleyway by sticking a knife to his throat from behind. He attempted to betray the party to a corrupt nobleman so he could get a higher percentage of loot, and he lightly antagonized several of the other party members. I have some great stories about him, but they're awesome, not terrible.

Player BD (for bard dervish) was a latecomer. First he played a bard and got really mad at me (the DM) for 1) a reasonable houserule about the unavailability of high level scrolls and 2) a really @$%^&y houserule I shouldn't have made about limitations on bardic music. After that, he changed characters to a dervish. He ragequit when I allowed another PC to make an attack roll against his character because how dare I allow PvP. This was directly after said other PC told him to keep his thieving hands away from the magic items they had discovered until they all had a chance to look at them and sort them out or she'd kick him in the face (she was a centaur) and he subsequently shoved past her to grab the items for himself. BD lasted one session each with his two characters.

[Talakeal]

I don't have any really bad stories. I do have two players who decided thieving from other party members (or doing the equivalent) was an okay thing to do, however.

Player A (for assassin) was a CN (actually mild CE, but I had forbidden evil characters. He did a good job for the most part and his disruptions never caused OOC problems, so I let him anyway) halfling rogue/assassin. His character introduction involved trying to mug the 6 foot tall human sorcerer in an alleyway by sticking a knife to his throat from behind. He attempted to betray the party to a corrupt nobleman so he could get a higher percentage of loot, and he lightly antagonized several of the other party members. I have some great stories about him, but they're awesome, not terrible.

Player BD (for bard dervish) was a latecomer. First he played a bard and got really mad at me (the DM) for 1) a reasonable houserule about the unavailability of high level scrolls and 2) a really @$%^&y houserule I shouldn't have made about limitations on bardic music. After that, he changed characters to a dervish. He ragequit when I allowed another PC to make an attack roll against his character because how dare I allow PvP. This was directly after said other PC told him to keep his thieving hands away from the magic items they had discovered until they all had a chance to look at them and sort them out or she'd kick him in the face (she was a centaur) and he subsequently shoved past her to grab the items for himself. BD lasted one session each with his two characters.

Thats always been a pet peeve of mine; DMs who disallow or punish direct PVP but allow all sorts of antagonistic jackassery like stealing from the party.

[goto124]

When things get to the point of PvP, something's wrong. Sadly the DM didn't go to the root of the problem.

The whole point of disallowing PvP is to stop antagonistic jackassery.

[hewhosaysfish]

Player A (for assassin) was a CN (actually mild CE, but I had forbidden evil characters. He did a good job for the most part and his disruptions never caused OOC problems, so I let him anyway) halfling rogue/assassin. His character introduction involved trying to mug the 6 foot tall human sorcerer in an alleyway by sticking a knife to his throat from behind.

Was he standing on as box? :smallconfused:

[ComaVision]

When things get to the point of PvP, something's wrong. Sadly the DM didn't go to the root of the problem.

The whole point of disallowing PvP is to stop antagonistic jackassery.

:smallsigh:

Not everyone has a problem with PvP and PvP is not necessarily antagonistic jackassery.

[Fumble Jack]

Was he standing on as box? :smallconfused:

Now there's an idea, for my games' thieves guild, latest black market pitch lol : "Having trouble with those tall marks? Step right up, to claim your boxes & step ladders, at only a 25% hike up from retail."

[VincentTakeda]

:smallsigh:

Not everyone has a problem with PvP and PvP is not necessarily antagonistic jackassery.

Not everyone has a problem with pvp and pvp is not necessarily antagonistic... It is however mostly jackassery.

[YossarianLives]

I feel so, so sorry for everyone who posted their terrible stories on this thread. You all have my sympathies.

[Fiery Diamond]

Was he standing on as box? :smallconfused:


That was what made it so funny. As described by the player, he stood on tiptoe and angled the knife upward so the tip was just barely close to the sorcerer's throat. Not at all intimidating or particularly threatening. It's why the party laughed at his character instead of attacking him.



Not everyone has a problem with pvp and pvp is not necessarily antagonistic... It is however mostly jackassery.

That's a matter of opinion. I've had plenty of PvP in my games with absolutely no one being upset. That was literally the only time that someone had a problem with it.

[Ravian]

I think you guys missed something.

Gs current character spends his combat rounds shooting once for 1d10 damage. And he spent four feats to be able to do that.


You know it's funny, this move actually reminds me of something a not-horrible player of mine did.

The guy had the potential to be a seriously powerful optimizer. He read through options meticulously and even on his own time. This was back in high school when I as the DM was typically the only one with any books to their name. He actually spent the time and energy to look for some info online, which was leagues more dedication than most of the players were able to manage.

However, despite having some of the best system mastery in my group, he was fairly low-key. He generally went for characters that let him be (mostly) effective in silly unconventional ways. For example in 4e he preferred to go with a warlord that let others attack on his turn. On one hand because he knew the Barbarian could do far more damage on his turn than he could manage, and secondly because he thought the idea of a weak combat inept character (If I recall correctly he dumped his strength to 8 so he would have more points for intelligence and charisma) shouting expert combat advice to the others.
(Nevertheless he actually went down in our gaming group's memory as the Claymore Warlord, after a series of lucky basic attacks at strength 8 with a greatsword he could barely lift managed to solo a really tough enemy)

Another time he actually tried to make a Rogue Trader character that could semi-effectively fight with flintlock muskets. (Which require a ridiculous number of turns to reload for a shot of comparable power to a lasgun.) If I recall correctly it required quick draw talents, several mechandrite arms, and a virtual barrel full of muskets. It was an utterly ridiculous concept and I'm sort of disappointed that the game for that character didn't get off the ground. Honestly I shudder to think what he could have done if he ever decided to go into a game with the express purpose of making the absolutely strongest character.

[Thanatos 51-50]

:smallsigh:

Not everyone has a problem with PvP and PvP is not necessarily antagonistic jackassery.

I once had a DM who encouraged PvP if there was a legitimate in-character reason.
There was a fellow player in this campaign who thought his character should be in charge of the party, but his character (A poorly-built drow ranger) never said anything to that effect. He also (rightly) assumed that my Rogue was skimming some funds off the top of our commission every time I found the group a job, and I never let any other party members get face-time with our employer, because said employer was very often the Thieve's Guild and I didn't want the party to get all nobler-than-thou at me. The money I skimmed off the top MOSTLY went straight to the upkeep of party equipment, lodgings, and there was even enough in the fund to resurrect one of us in case of emergency. I did, however, spend some for personal use. Every other player at the table who learned of this action was okay with it.

So, the ranger's player tried to hire a bunch of Orcs in a village we were sheltering to assassinate my character while he was sleeping. He tried to hire them with gold. I had, literally two hours earlier, contracted the party to fix an issue that made the tribe unable to feed itself, so the Orcs refused his offer, citing that they wanted a source of food, not "Useless yellow metal". The player throws a minor tantrum. Before we set out, the tribe's chieftan informed me of the plot and the DM gently reminded me that he allowed PvP.

I ended up feeding the character to a bear. Literally every other person at the table approved. The ranger's player, however, got upset, whined that the DM shouldn't allow us to backstab each other if he wasn't allowed to backstab me ("Because it's unfair! You're favouring Thanatos!"), and left the group.
The rest of the campaign was great fun without him.

EDIT:
I feel that I should clarify that the only reason I started skimming off the top in the first place was to pay off a group of bounty hunters (My character was an escaped slave), and it continued because the DM just assumed it did and gave me an extra couple of shares whenever he wrote down the spoils and passed the note to me

[VincentTakeda]

I've had plenty of PvP in my games with absolutely no one being upset. That was literally the only time that someone had a problem with it.

That doesnt make it not jackassery, that just makes it 'not antagonistic' heheheheheh.

[Talakeal]

While we are on the subject of PvP:

Mr: Not Evil:

So the last time I ran a 3.5 campaign there was a "Chaotic Neutral" rogue in the party. Now, he was your stereotypical sociopath and did whatever he wanted to get ahead in the world. He would lie, cheat, steal, and even murder people if it was convenient. He regularly stole from the rest of the party if he thought he could get away with it.

At one point the party looted a cursed sword of berserking which causes the wielder to go into a blood rage and kill anyone around them when it was drawn. He sold it to the town guard of a city under siege knowing that it was cursed but bluffing that is was actually a powerful beneficial artifact, not only taking a healthy amount of money from a town that desperately needed it. The result was, of course, a massacre of the innocent civilians the town guard was trying to protect.

At this point the rest of the party told him that they had enough of him and at that point he was worse than the villains they were fighting. His response to shrug and say that his hide / sneak skills were so high that even if he rolled a 1 and they rolled a 20 they couldn't see him, so if they decided to attack him he would just follow them for the rest of their lives and sneak attack them whenever they were in a vulnerable position.

Now, here is the great part. When I as the DM had a talk about his alignment he adamantly insisted that he was neutral, not evil. When I asked him to justify his numerous evil actions he claimed "My victims are themselves evil more often than not. I go along with the party on their "quests" to kill and rob the real evil people in the world, thus my good deeds in vanquishing evil more than make up for the crimes I commit against good or neutral NPCs, thus my alignment balances out."

[Mr Beer]

^^^

Don't see the problem here:

1. As a party, I would say "OK, I guess you could hide and then track us down and kill us one by one. Damn, I guess that's that then. Nothing we can do here, so carry on." And 6 hours later, murder him in his sleep.

2. As a GM, I would say "You're evil because you play an evil character, BTW killing other evil things doesn't balance it out, hence demons and devils aren't neutral just because the Blood Wars. You can call it what you like, but that's what you are." And then apply the appropriate alignment against any and all protests.

[zinycor]

^^^

Don't see the problem here:

1. As a party, I would say "OK, I guess you could hide and then track us down and kill us one by one. Damn, I guess that's that then. Nothing we can do here, so carry on." And 6 hours, later murder him in his sleep.

2. As a GM, I would say "You're evil because you play an evil character, BTW killing other evil things doesn't balance it out, hence demons and devils aren't neutral just because the Blood Wars. You can call it what you like, but that's what you are." And then apply the appropriate alignment against any and all protests.


I have always wondered. Why is being marked as evil such a bad thing? on the campaigns that i have played it has never been a problem, i only think it could be a problem if you are a paladin or cleric, and then the problem is that you are roleplaying poorly.... But even then you can always become an anti-paladin or an evil cleric, which could be a lot of fun to hide from people, or having legitimate reasons to be evil...

[Talakeal]

I have always wondered. Why is being marked as evil such a bad thing? on the campaigns that i have played it has never been a problem, i only think it could be a problem if you are a paladin or cleric, and then the problem is that you are roleplaying poorly.... But even then you can always become an anti-paladin or an evil cleric, which could be a lot of fun to hide from people, or having legitimate reasons to be evil...

Nothing is wrong with playing an evil character if everyone is onboard. But if the other people are down for a typical heroic quest to fight evil and one player wants to be an anti social miscreant there are going to be problems.

Also, I don't think the player in question wanted the term evil because he has a somewhat warped morality irl and fully believed that his character's actions were justified.


^^^

Don't see the problem here:

1. As a party, I would say "OK, I guess you could hide and then track us down and kill us one by one. Damn, I guess that's that then. Nothing we can do here, so carry on." And 6 hours later, murder him in his sleep.

2. As a GM, I would say "You're evil because you play an evil character, BTW killing other evil things doesn't balance it out, hence demons and devils aren't neutral just because the Blood Wars. You can call it what you like, but that's what you are." And then apply the appropriate alignment against any and all protests.

Unfortunately one of the other players is a paladin and wouldn't resort to such a dishonorable tactic. And frankly I am not sure that tactic would work as I believe you still get a listen test to wake up, she had more XP than could be dealt in one attack, and probably had a ring of sustenance and never slept or some such thing that I don't remember now.

[Lord Torath]

Unfortunately one of the other players is a paladin and wouldn't resort to such a dishonorable tactic. And frankly I am not sure that tactic would work as I believe you still get a listen test to wake up, she had more XP than could be dealt in one attack, and probably had a ring of sustenance and never slept or some such thing that I don't remember now.Any mage/cleric with Hold Person? Faerie Fire? Entangle? How do rogue's will saves generally match up? Anyone have Trip?

So here's your plan: Someone calls the rogue over to inspect a "treasure" (for best results, use a genuine minor magic item or valuable gem). Rest of party crowds in behind/around rogue to see what's going on prevent him fleeing. Then "sneak attack" the rogue into a fine red mist (yes, rogues get Sneak Attack, not everyone else. That's why "sneak attack" is in quotes and not capitalized).

[Mr Beer]

I have always wondered. Why is being marked as evil such a bad thing? on the campaigns that i have played it has never been a problem, i only think it could be a problem if you are a paladin or cleric, and then the problem is that you are roleplaying poorly.... But even then you can always become an anti-paladin or an evil cleric, which could be a lot of fun to hide from people, or having legitimate reasons to be evil...

It doesn't have to be. There are various alignment related effects in game though, which is why I'd be more likely to insist that's what the character is, if they blatantly are.

[Mr Beer]

Unfortunately one of the other players is a paladin and wouldn't resort to such a dishonorable tactic. And frankly I am not sure that tactic would work as I believe you still get a listen test to wake up, she had more XP than could be dealt in one attack, and probably had a ring of sustenance and never slept or some such thing that I don't remember now.

A committed party can generally kill the traitor in their midst if they want to. I would make it happen if I was playing {scrubbed}

[Anonymouswizard]

I have always wondered. Why is being marked as evil such a bad thing? on the campaigns that i have played it has never been a problem, i only think it could be a problem if you are a paladin or cleric, and then the problem is that you are roleplaying poorly.... But even then you can always become an anti-paladin or an evil cleric, which could be a lot of fun to hide from people, or having legitimate reasons to be evil...

I want to play a cleric of Wee Jas who believes that everyone should die in their proper time and place, and is willing to murder one 'good' person to ensure 10 'evil' people die at the correct time, which just so happens to be about 10 years down the line. I need to check with my next DM whether or not this'll be neutral or evil, although I'm personally shooting for lawful evil with the character.


Nothing is wrong with playing an evil character if everyone is onboard. But if the other people are down for a typical heroic quest to fight evil and one player wants to be an anti social miscreant there are going to be problems.

Here we get the fact that there are different types of evil. As long as the party doesn't include a paladin there are several kinds of evil characters that can work. The psychopathic ******** is suspiciously absent from this list though.


Unfortunately one of the other players is a paladin and wouldn't resort to such a dishonorable tactic. And frankly I am not sure that tactic would work as I believe you still get a listen test to wake up, she had more XP than could be dealt in one attack, and probably had a ring of sustenance and never slept or some such thing that I don't remember now.

This is the one problem I have with the paladin, the complete requirement to be honourable. I think this, more than the being good, is what allows GMs to set up no-win situations for Paladins (you can argue that saving the orphanage is more good than saving the Baron, and so you didn't commit an evil act).

[goto124]

So, the ranger's player tried to hire a bunch of Orcs in a village we were sheltering to assassinate my character.

If I were the DM, I would've talked to the players as soon as this bit happened.

My thought process is: If there's PvP, it means there's friction between the players. If there's friction between the players, it should be handled OOCly. Trying to do it ICly only leads to more drama.

Could you kindly care to describe how PvP is run at your table please?

[Thanatos 51-50]

If I were the DM, I would've talked to the players as soon as this bit happened.

My thought process is: If there's PvP, it means there's friction between the players. If there's friction between the players, it should be handled OOCly. Trying to do it ICly only leads to more drama.

Could you kindly care to describe how PvP is run at your table please?

That group has since disbanded, and I'm pretty sure at least half of the persons involved are in different countries.

At that table, it was resolved like any other combat. Initiative was rolled, any other PCs standing around took sides or didn't fight as they saw fit, and everything was out in the open to ensure no cheating happened. Sudden betrayals (Like, say, attacking an "ally" while a fight was already in progress), was treated like attacking with a flanking bonus. Sliding that "ally" and knocking him prone in front of a bear that he had spent the previous round attacking was considered a dirty, but legal, trick.
With normal Sneak Attack bonuses for being a Rogue.

[goto124]

I didn't mean mechanics, sorry! I meant the social parts of PvP. How did you avoid the nastier parts of friction between players?

[Anxe]

I didn't mean mechanics, sorry! I meant the social parts of PvP. How did you avoid the nastier parts of friction between players?

My group talks about it before hand. "This is where I want to go with this character. Is it alright if I do this to your character?" PvP doesn't have to be friction between players, it can just be between characters.

[BootStrapTommy]

1. As a party, I would say "OK, I guess you could hide and then track us down and kill us one by one. Damn, I guess that's that then. Nothing we can do here, so carry on." And 6 hours later, murder him in his sleep. *Volunteers for first watch*
*Coup-de-grace*

[Thanatos 51-50]

I didn't mean mechanics, sorry! I meant the social parts of PvP. How did you avoid the nastier parts of friction between players?

I paitently explained my reasoning out of character and after the fact, and we got over it like a pair of adults.
Good thing, too, because dude was one my room mates.

[TheFool]

Reading all of these stories makes me think of a player who by far had the most number of characters of the few Exalted games I ran over the course of a couple of years. Let's call this guy K. To be clear, K is a pretty nice and generous guy. However, when he plays characters he can be a little... off when it comes to social interactions. He started as a JRPG-loving power gamer who would only play sassy female ninjas... and evolved into a pretty decent, JRPG-loving roleplayer who ALSO played sassy female sorceresses.

For the sake of entertainment, I'll describe a few of K's best characters.

The Ninja

In the first Exalted game I ran (and my first time running a game) K created a Sexy Female Ninja (tm) who always insisted on being the center of attention. Two characters were an estranged husband/wife couple. The Ninja made sure to sabotage their wounded marriage by both visibly trying to seduce the husband and inserting herself into the conversation whenever the couple would try to settle their differences.

That marriage did not last. K - 1, Marriage - 0

K was also particularly bad with in-game social interactions. Every time The Ninja was confronted for being not-the-nicest-person, K - literally - held out a fist and say "Pew Pew" to imply that The Ninja punched the other character in the face. This happened at least once a session. The other players very quickly learned how to subdue The Ninja, or at least de-escalate the situation before I could say "Are you SURE that you want to punch the magistrate in the face??"

But it got worse. After the first campaign story arc, I told the players that we were going to have a bit of a change of scenery from a small 100-kingdoms setting to the closest big city, Greyfalls. I encouraged each player to think of how they would infiltrate Greyfalls, and I crafted a whole storyline around political intrigue, unexpected allies and shadowy enemies. Most of my players came up with great ideas - establishing nightclubs in the city, buying a brewery, etc. The Ninja, however, had no plans. So in our first session in Part II of the game, we spent two hours describing each characters' new digs and how they were infiltrating the town.

And then K's Ninja decides to show up in the middle of the town square in broad daylight and start murdering guardsmen. The entire city erupts into chaos. The Ninja proceeds to slowly, and singlehandedly fight her way up a series of ~500 steps to the military district, where she is challenged to single combat by a very capable dragonblood immaculate monk. The Ninja loses horribly, and only survives because her 5-dot lunar companion ally pulls a hail mary and saves her in the nick of time.

K - 2; DM - 0

Naturally, this derails my entire planned campaign, which was supposed to last ~10 sessions. Also, K soon realizes that he's written himself into a corner with The Ninja, and wants to go down in a blaze of glory. I indulge him and establish that The Ninja pissed off her Sidereal handlers so much that they assassinate her.

For years to come whenever chaos loomed in the game, players would invoke the name of "The Ninja" as reminder.

The Sorceress

In another campaign K managed to ALMOST derail my plans in the first session. A circle of solars was in a small town outside of Chiascuro following a Macguffin, when a very visible Wyld Hunt came into town looking for "An Anathema." They had no indication that the Hunt was after the solar circle, but I made it very clear that it would be a good idea to keep a low profile because the leader of the Wyld Hunt was an experienced Wood Immaculate Monk (read: can kill you with a single touch).

To complicate matters, during the night I had K's character sleeping in the inn only to wake up to an Abyssal assassin in her bedroom. K's immediate (not second, not third) response was to cast Death of Obsidian Butterflies INDOORS and STRAIGHT UP - a spell that makes a fireball look like a roman candle. As a result, the roof of the inn completely disintegrated, and the entire town was peppered in razor-sharp obsidian stones in the shape of butterflies.

Naturally the Wyld Hunt began an inquisition, and arrested The Sorceress on suspicion (I had allowed her to blend in with the crowd, but K again played his character to a sassy hilt). Locked in an underground jail cell, she was directly questioned by the Wood Immaculate Monk. A few poor social interactions kept raising the ire of the monk, with the Sorceress eventually trying to cast another spell to get out of the situation. Well, that trick didn't work twice. The monk (rightly) surmised that The Sorceress was an anathema, and proceeded to death-touch her before the entire town exploded into firey ash.

... I felt a little guilty as DM as this was just the first session, and effectively allowed K to roll a character who was The Sorceresses' "Sister," as K was a pretty good sport about the whole situation.

Later The Sister also turned out to be evil, naturally. She became the final boss for the party. K rolled a new character (a sassy socialite) who lasted to the end of the entire campaign and was honestly an awesome addition to the circle.

K had other indiscretions, but the ones I described were the most fun. While K was a headache at the time, honestly, as a new DM/ST it was great having K in the group because he helped me think more on my toes and realize that you. can. never. predict. what's. going. to. happen. I learned a lot from those situations, and these are stories I vividly remember years later.

[Prof.Smythe]

I've had some pretty bad moments myself. Sometimes being the bad moment. Let's see, probably nothing as compared to what some of you guys have gone through but:
<> Have personally meta'd when knowing the setting and quite frankly lost my $#!£ when something didn't make sense in-world. (Yes your Bioshock inspired game was going well, no I am not going to be cool with you decreeing that warforged were created by taking a regular person and putting them into a machine to turn them into robots...)
<> Argued rules. Because my reading of it is slightly different to yours (granted mine is normally to the detriment of myself more often than not)
<> Will walk all over other players in game if they're not actually doing anything (and I'll probably be a bit of a prick about it)

All in all I'm a pretty terrible person.

[irian]

Custom system where you roll some of the character background.
Players: player X, me and another woman.
Setting: a recently occupied city where half-demons are about to be burn at the stake by the occupying military. Naturally, our pc were half-demons.

X wanted a rogue and rolled "Important Friend" and "You are poor commoner".
The gm decided that his pc was the lover of a noble matriarch, her toy boy, and that he lived on the streets when not summoned by her.

The game started with the matriarch telling our pcs to run and where they would find shelter in another state. The pcs did as she ordered.
In this new city, X played his rogue as someone only looking to seduce any beautiful woman he could find.
My pc and the other one were asked to meet a very shady and very dangerous npc to find information and help to save their city and they made the mistake to accept without asking the rogue. In their defense, before the meeting, the pcs were told to walk away if they weren't sure, because there wouldn't be turning back.
The meeting went to hell: the rogue started to challenge the npc, questioning everything he said and, at the end, telling he wanted out. Before walking away, the npc told him that there would be consequence, but the rogue accepted them. That session ended with two pc barricading themselves in one room, while the rogue was waiting the return of the npc.
The next session, the gm rolled back the meeting: the rogue never attended it.
While the other pcs were getting ready for a mission, X drove his pc in a corner: the rogue wanted orders from the matriarch, but he couldn't contact her because it was too dangerous, it took too much time and the matriarch cut any link with our pcs.
The rogue needed money to send a message that wouldn't get a reply (the gm was clear about it) and he started whoring himself to noble women because it was the only honest method he knew to get it.

When we asked why he was doing that, X revealed that he didn't like his background and he didn't want to play that type of adventure.
The pcs were supposed to move continually, without a stable base, to stop a mad cult from gather fragments of an artifact. X wanted to have a stable base, go to various missions but don't have to save the world.

We had to end the campaign because there wasn't a way to introduce a new character for him.

A little note: In their first encounter, the rogue fondled my pc because he wanted a scroll she was holding and he could get away with it. My pc could do nothing without starting a battle: she wanted to freeze him, but X insisted to roll initiative. At the end, I decided to let it go.

This was my first rpg campaing.

[zinycor]

Custom system where you roll some of the character background.
Players: player X, me and another woman.
Setting: a recentily occupied city where half-demons are about to be burn at the stake by the occuping military. Naturally, our pc were half-demons.

X wanted a rogue and rolled "Important Friend" and "You are poor commoner".
The gm decided that his pc was the lover of a noble matriarch, her toy boy, and that he lived on the streets when not summonned by her.

The game started with the matriarch telling our pcs to run and where they would find shelter in another state. The pcs did as she ordered.
In this new city, X played his rogue as someone only looking to seduce any beautiful woman he could find.
My pc and the other one were asked to meet a very shady and very dangerous npc to find information and help to save their city and they made the mistake to accept without asking the rogue. In their defense, before the meeting, the pcs were told to walk away if they weren't sure, because there wouldn't be turning back.
The meeting went to hell: the rogue started to challenge the npc, questioning everything he said and, at the end, telling he wanted out. Before walking away, the npc told him that there would be conseguence, but the rogue accepted them. That session ended with two pc barricating themself in one room, while the rogue was waiting the return of the npc.
The next session, the gm rolled back the meeting: the rogue never attended it.
While the other pcs were getting ready for a mission, X drove his pc in a corner: the rogue wanted orders from the matriarch, but he couldn't contact her because it was too dangerous, it took too much time and the matriarch cut any link with our pcs.
The rogue needed money to send a message that wouldn't get a reply (the gm was clear about it) and he started whoring himself to noble women because it was the only honest method he knew to get it.

When we asked why he was doing that, X revealed that he didn't like his background and he didn't want to play that type of adventure.
The pcs were supposed to move continually, without a stable base, to stop a mad cult from gather fragments of an artifact. X wanted to have a stable base, go to various missions but don't have to save the world.

A little note: In their first encounter, the rogue fondled my pc because he wanted a scroll she was holding and he could get away with it. My pc could do nothing without starting a battle: she wanted to freeze him, but X insisted to roll initiative. At the end, I decided to let it go.

This was my first rpg campaing.

doesn't seem too bad, As i read it it seems lke a common problem, if the players didn't know before hand that they would always be on the move and trying to save the world is only natural that someone might come with a not so appropiatte character.

[Gritmonger]

*sigh* - my brother's friend.

I ran a number of campaign for my brother and his group of friends, including this flattened affect really creepy guy. For context, flattened affect creepy guy was asked to watch our parent's house for a week or so while they were away, and my brother asked me to go with to see how things were before my parents got back. This friend of my brother's had put various stuffed animals belonging to my youngest brother and sister in various states of suicide around the house, complete with notes declaring their intentions to end their lives and why.

So, context.

So he decides, on a binge weekend of one-shot campaigns, to make his next character - "The Grey Death" - Chaotic Neutral, of course, whose only clothing consisted of A mask of human fetuses

He was a demented individual, and it showed in his roleplay. His actions were generally calculated for maximum shock factor, rather than some of the chaotic stupid characters a lot of us might have experienced in the past. It was often best for me to simply say "sure, you do that" than make him roll for any of the actions he chose, because then I'd be dragged into detailed exposition of what he was doing.

[Maglubiyet]

*sigh* - my brother's friend.

Is...is this individual still with us?

[Gritmonger]

Is...is this individual still with us?

Yes, but I have no interaction with him after some of what he "joked" about doing to my infant son.

[Ravian]

Yes, but I have no interaction with him after some of what he "joked" about doing to my infant son.

Do not blame you, guy either has very poor impulse control and a profound misunderstanding of taboos and common decency, or else he's actually got a serious problem. Either way not the type you want to be around. Especially when it gets personal like that.

[irian]

doesn't seem too bad, As i read it it seems lke a common problem, if the players didn't know before hand that they would always be on the move and trying to save the world is only natural that someone might come with a not so appropiatte character.
Sorry, I forgot to write that we had to end the campaign because we couldn't add a new character for him.
Nobody had an appropriate character: my pc was a mage that loved books and libraries and the last pg was one of the matriarch's guards.

[themaque]

The Goat... uhmm. HERDER for sake of these boards.

He played a cleric and first off, demanded special mounts for his chariot. These war goats he got from an odd supplement. The GM was nice, and allowed him less broken versions there of. he then made it his mission to cross breed these goats. He would seek out other goats with traits, and go into disturbing detail as to how he would go about this.

he would take... unusual samples from fallen monsters. Some of us suspect to help breed his goats, so you can assume what samples he was collecting.

As a Joke (?) he made careful to mention that he HAD touch and "feel" anyone he was attempting to heal. The Women especially.

His wife at one point took him aside and loudly said "Dear, please don't get us kicked out of another group."

It's a shame, she seemed nice, and had to go looking for another group after one play session.

[Anonymouswizard]

The Goat... uhmm. HERDER for sake of these boards.

He played a cleric and first off, demanded special mounts for his chariot. These war goats he got from an odd supplement. The GM was nice, and allowed him less broken versions there of. he then made it his mission to cross breed these goats. He would seek out other goats with traits, and go into disturbing detail as to how he would go about this.

:smalleek: What was the GM's response to this? did he allow it? Was he suddenly just visible behind the screen? This sounds like taking advantage of a good GM.


he would take... unusual samples from fallen monsters. Some of us suspect to help breed his goats, so you can assume what samples he was collecting.

Please please please tell me the goats were both male.


As a Joke (?) he made careful to mention that he HAD touch and "feel" anyone he was attempting to heal. The Women especially.

...This alone would have made me have serious talks with him. Yes, there MAY be gods that require this for healing (mainly gods of lust), but there is a reason those portfolios are rarely in the game. Was there any fluff reason he gave for why he had to do that, because there are a handful I'd except, as long as it was 'I have to touch that specific area', not 'I have to grope them'. But considering I'm using the bulletproof nudity rule in my next GURPS campaign (although slightly altered to be gender neutral) I may not be the best judge.


His wife at one point took him aside and loudly said "Dear, please don't get us kicked out of another group."

It's a shame, she seemed nice, and had to go looking for another group after one play session.

Did you try inviting her back? Because it sounds like he might have been there to either mess around or be with her, whereas she sounds like someone interested in playing.

[themaque]

:smalleek: What was the GM's response to this? did he allow it? Was he suddenly just visible behind the screen? This sounds like taking advantage of a good GM.

Yes, he was trying to abuse a good GM. We barely knew these people at this time so where trying to give them the benefit of the doubt.



Please please please tell me the goats were both male.
Do not recall. May have blocked from my memory.




...This alone would have made me have serious talks with him. Yes, there MAY be gods that require this for healing (mainly gods of lust), but there is a reason those portfolios are rarely in the game. Was there any fluff reason he gave for why he had to do that, because there are a handful I'd except, as long as it was 'I have to touch that specific area', not 'I have to grope them'. But considering I'm using the bulletproof nudity rule in my next GURPS campaign (although slightly altered to be gender neutral) I may not be the best judge.
Straw that not only broke the camel's back, but also all four legs, neck and gave him a severe concussion.




Did you try inviting her back? Because it sounds like he might have been there to either mess around or be with her, whereas she sounds like someone interested in playing.

Nope. Problem with married couples, they can occasionally become a package deal. He turned the players and the GM off so badly we simply let their number vanish and we never heard from them again.

Luckily my wife knows that sometimes I enjoy games I wouldn't enjoy. and the rare game she enjoys that I don't means we game together when we can but allow each other free time.

[Marlowe]

[CLANG CLANG CLANG]

Update on G! Advice maybe needed!:smalleek:

OK. The party, as a result of some misadventures, just came into possession of a valuable, but non-magical platinum bracelet worth about a thousand gold. When we attempted to sell it we were told it was a unique, known item and the personal property of a fairly important NPC. To be precise, the Lord Mayoress of our home base city. Presumably, it had been stolen from her by the people we had just dealt to and taken it from.

When we discovered this, we changed our minds about selling it, as news would certainly get back to the rightful owner and her antagonism would probably cost us a lot more than what the item was worth.

Well, most of the party decided against selling it. G kept muttering something along the lines of "I don't care what some b---h thinks. Gold's gold."

Anyway, we were able to talk him out of that and we kept hold of the item. I assumed (I think most of the party assumed) that we'd be returning it to the rightful owner when we got back to town, for whatever favour or reward we might get. Better than having to dodge assassins. That was two sessions ago.

Well, G (who was the one physically keeping hold of the item), via note-passing, has informed the DM that he's cut the bracelet into four parts (there are five members of the party now. I think he's forgotten) hammered it to remove identifying features, and is selling his piece off independently. I'm not really supposed to know this, but the DM needed a rant.

So; he's destroyed a unique item with a known politically powerful owner, one that we are known to be in possession of, one that was part of party goods, and he's selling it as scrap metal.

I honestly don't know if he's deliberately trolling us or if he really doesn't get how flat-out stupid this is.:smalleek: Cut-up and mangled, the pieces will only be worth a few gold. And when word gets back to the rightful owner we will be in a lot of trouble.

Can anyone think of a tactful way of telling him what he's done wrong? No one wants an argument. We have two new players.

[Sith_Happens]

G (who was the one physically keeping hold of the item)

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/well-theres-your-problem.jpg

I'm going to be honest, at this point you deserve what you get for letting G near anything important. Thankfully, in this case the solution is simple: When the time comes for the party to have to explain themselves, throw him under the bus and don't look back.

[YossarianLives]

http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/well-theres-your-problem.jpg

I'm going to be honest, at this point you deserve what you get for letting G near anything important. Thankfully, in this case the solution is simple: When the time comes for the party to have to explain themselves, throw him under the bus and don't look back.
Unfortunately I'm forced to agree. Why did you ever give G something so important?

[Feddlefew]

Isn't G the one who would DEMAND to have things and threaten other party members with violence if he didn't get his way?

ETA: There's probably a spell that can restore the bracelet to it's original condition, assuming it's completely mundane. But throwing G's character under the bus instead of using the magical equivalent of ctrl-Z.

[Talakeal]

That's actually not that unusual of a situation. I know Vikings would routinely break their plunder down into pieces so that they could evenly divide it between members of the war band.

[Vertharrad]

Get the other piece back when you find out, make whole the item if it's not magical and throw G to the mayoress as the culprit with all permission to punish him as wanted. There are consequences for every action...time he found out. With the rest of the party as voice against him shouldn't be too hard to convince her that he didn't act with the parties approval.

[Feddlefew]

Yeah, I think Make Whole (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/makeWhole.htm) should fix the bracelet, as long as you have all the pieces. "Warped" seems to specifically mean warped wood, and he didn't melt it down. It's also a cleric 1 2 spell, so as long as you have someone who can cast those you should be good.

Edit : Typo!

[Marlowe]

Make Whole will not fix the item if a quarter of it has been sold for scrap. The Viking (generically northern european) tendency to subdivide loot and conquest was a serious problem for them (Remember Canute? Ruled England, and Denmark? Take a look at what happened after he died. While we're on that; look at Charlemagne's sons). And in any event, he did not divide a pile of coins. He destroyed a work of art, ruining all the intrinsic value of the craftsmanship and reducing it to a mess of raw metal.

The analogy I suggested to the DM went like this; "Imagine a painting by a famous artist, worth so much money. Now imagine a scrap of canvas torn from that painting and with half the paint scraped off. Is that scrap worth one-quarter of the whole painting?"

Yes, we were totally at fault for leaving a valuable item in his possession. We were totally at fault for expecting him to have some grasp of common sense, common property, the value of artistry, and the value of having rich and powerful allies as opposed to rich and powerful people with a grudge against us.

Not that there was any possibility of getting it away from him short of beating him up in the street. This is not the issue.

The issue now is how to communicate how much a frustercluck he's made without it turning into a RL fight and scaring off the the new guys.

[themaque]

One problem is, you are not supposed to know about it.

If you bring it up to him, it will really fracture the TRUST between him and the GM. I think the GM needs to be the one to talk to him first.

If that doesn't work... you will have to do your best to calmly explain the situation when it comes up in game.

[johnbragg]

Make Whole will not fix the item if a quarter of it has been sold for scrap. The Viking (generically northern european) tendency to subdivide loot and conquest was a serious problem for them (Remember Canute? Ruled England, and Denmark? Take a look at what happened after he died. While we're on that; look at Charlemagne's sons). And in any event, he did not divide a pile of coins. He destroyed a work of art, ruining all the intrinsic value of the craftsmanship and reducing it to a mess of raw metal.

The analogy I suggested to the DM went like this; "Imagine a painting by a famous artist, worth so much money. Now imagine a scrap of canvas torn from that painting and with half the paint scraped off. Is that scrap worth one-quarter of the whole painting?"

Yes, we were totally at fault for leaving a valuable item in his possession. We were totally at fault for expecting him to have some grasp of common sense, common property, the value of artistry, and the value of having rich and powerful allies as opposed to rich and powerful people with a grudge against us.

Not that there was any possibility of getting it away from him short of beating him up in the street. This is not the issue.

The issue now is how to communicate how much a frustercluck he's made without it turning into a RL fight and scaring off the the new guys.

If you go back through the thread, most of the stories end with someone leaving the group, either the Worst Player Ever or the poster.

You have some new players? It's time for G to leave the group.

The DM should handle this.
Clarify to the new players that their PCs don't know this, this is an out-of-character discussion.
DM if going to tell what G did, and G's player is going to suggest how to fix it, and the group will roleplay it after you decide.

1. G stole party loot. G had it, now it's gone.
2. The bracelet scrap platinum is now worth say 5-10 gp as scrap, the approximate coin value if you melted it down and minted it. You'll get less selling it.
3. The Lord-Mayoress is now likely to be a party antagonist.
4. Ask G why he cut the bracelet into 4 pieces in the first place instead of 5.

And ask G where he thinks the story should go from here, because he's screwed things up pretty badly, and it's hard to see why the party would keep him when they find out.
What does G think should happen when the party asks for the bracelet to go give it to Lord-Mayoress Questgiver.

[Cazero]

Relevant to G story. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vase_of_Soissons)
I couldn't help but notice how similar your situation is to that historical event. Maybe you could split his body in 4 as he did to the bracelet?

[Anxe]

It seems like he destroyed the bracelet essentially out of spite. If removing him from the group isn't an option... Level the party guns at him. He's destroyed valuable property and the rest of the PCs won't put up with that. Get his piece back and Make Whole. If he sells it, interrogate him about who he sold it to and get it back. Pay double to whoever needs it back.

And most importantly, whatever reward was coming from this with the noble person, his punishment is he gets none of that.

[themaque]

I've actually got one more for the list.

The other worst gamer ever was... ME.

I was playing a dwarf barbarian named Mad Badger. We where traveling through a savannah and he was hoping to kill a wyvern. Why? Badger just thought it would be fun and I heard they where in the area. The concept was Troll Slayer from Warhammer. He was WANTING to die in combat and relished the opportunity. he was sleeping in the covered wagon when I heard

"WYVERN WYVERN WYVERN!"

Badger LEAPED from the tent ready to fight when... nothing. The druid was laughing at him.

-THUNK-

He hurls an ax into the post by the druid's head "Don't do that again"

"Ha! good thing we didn't see a wyvern, can't even hit a man 20 feet from you!"

"I didn't miss"

"sure sure whatever you.. WAGH!"

The second ax hits the druid.

"I didn't miss"

He casts entangle. "What are you insane?!?"

"Take this spell off me, or else"

"NO! you hit me, all I did was have a joke and you hit me!"

"drop the spell"

"You sill stay there until I'm ready to let you go!"

"RARGH!"

Badger rages, rips through the entanglement, and reaches the druid. He is an alternate druid who instead of shapeshift can rage, so he feels he will show me what he can do.

What the Druid could do was lose. Finally he throws down his axes and stares at me defiantly. I asked if he looked submissive or remorseful in any way. "No, I stands there defiantly"

AND that's where I went to far. The Barbarian, who was still raging, strikes him down and screams "ANYONE ELSE!?!" That is when the Warlock shot badger with eldritch blast.

Long story short [to late] I ended up killing everyone but the guy playing my brother. We still had people to save, so ended up going back to town in order to try and recruit more help.

This is of me letting playing my character get in the way of playing the game. I should have just let him walk it off, cool off. No one else seemed to get when I wasn't asking for people to defy me, Badger needed ONE person to say "NO please stop!" but... I should have stopped him. It was in character, but i was a BAD ROLE PLAYER and I regret it. When you are so caught up in your character, you make choices that hurt the party as a whole. But I was like that, I was an ACTOR, and combine that with being a rules lawyer power gamer and I was the worst of both worlds.

Man, I'm glad I grew out of that phase.

[YossarianLives]

The player in question is a good friend of mine and a great DM... But he is prone to playing chaotic stupid murderhobos who ruin campaigns.

I'll call him Q.

First the group is very low Op. Me and Q are the only people who knows the first thing about optimization. Q likes playing wizards. Also warforged. He really likes warforged. Some of his hijinks have become party jokes. Like the time he stole a valuable trophy and escaped by walking into the ocean.

Other incidents have been, less amusing. Like the time he ruined a really nice, fun campaign by going into space in a game of d&d 3.5.

I think he may also be poised to ruin another campaign. Last session after his totemist was killed he rolled up a warforged warblade and promptly began slaughtering everything in sight.

[Zyzzyva]

Not that there was any possibility of getting it away from him short of beating him up in the street. This is not the issue.

The issue now is how to communicate how much a frustercluck he's made without it turning into a RL fight and scaring off the the new guys.

You also need to consider the value in not teaching the new guys that this is acceptable behaviour.

I agree with the others that, if this is GM-confidential, then the GM needs to talk to him first; but if he's just being a jerk to the other players there's no reason to keep him around out of some misguided sense of solidarity.

[ComaVision]

If I was new to a group and we immediately had a sit-down to discuss how in game events hurt someone's feelings I'd be gone immediately, I'm not signing on for drama. I'd advise keeping it out of the new players' view.

[SowZ]

[CLANG CLANG CLANG]

Update on G! Advice maybe needed!:smalleek:

OK. The party, as a result of some misadventures, just came into possession of a valuable, but non-magical platinum bracelet worth about a thousand gold. When we attempted to sell it we were told it was a unique, known item and the personal property of a fairly important NPC. To be precise, the Lord Mayoress of our home base city. Presumably, it had been stolen from her by the people we had just dealt to and taken it from.

When we discovered this, we changed our minds about selling it, as news would certainly get back to the rightful owner and her antagonism would probably cost us a lot more than what the item was worth.

Well, most of the party decided against selling it. G kept muttering something along the lines of "I don't care what some b---h thinks. Gold's gold."

Anyway, we were able to talk him out of that and we kept hold of the item. I assumed (I think most of the party assumed) that we'd be returning it to the rightful owner when we got back to town, for whatever favour or reward we might get. Better than having to dodge assassins. That was two sessions ago.

Well, G (who was the one physically keeping hold of the item), via note-passing, has informed the DM that he's cut the bracelet into four parts (there are five members of the party now. I think he's forgotten) hammered it to remove identifying features, and is selling his piece off independently. I'm not really supposed to know this, but the DM needed a rant.

So; he's destroyed a unique item with a known politically powerful owner, one that we are known to be in possession of, one that was part of party goods, and he's selling it as scrap metal.

I honestly don't know if he's deliberately trolling us or if he really doesn't get how flat-out stupid this is.:smalleek: Cut-up and mangled, the pieces will only be worth a few gold. And when word gets back to the rightful owner we will be in a lot of trouble.

Can anyone think of a tactful way of telling him what he's done wrong? No one wants an argument. We have two new players.

Honestly, if he plans on giving the other party members their piece/cut, it sounds like a character decision that isn't very disruptive. I've seen far worse. Bad decision tactically? Maybe.

[Sith_Happens]

Yes, we were totally at fault for leaving a valuable item in his possession. We were totally at fault for expecting him to have some grasp of common sense, common property, the value of artistry, and the value of having rich and powerful allies as opposed to rich and powerful people with a grudge against us.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic here, but given his past behavior it is in fact partially your fault. Fool you once, shame on him, fool you twice, shame on you.


Not that there was any possibility of getting it away from him short of beating him up in the street.

Which would have been trivially easy.


The issue now is how to communicate how much a frustercluck he's made without it turning into a RL fight and scaring off the the new guys.

I already answered this. Wait for an NPC to communicate it for you, then throw him under the bus with extreme prejudice. If you're worried he's going to throw a fit over this (which he probably will), talk with the DM beforehand and make your best case that he needs to stop being part of the group if he's going to keep doing that.

[Dimers]

One problem is, you are not supposed to know about it. If you bring it up to him, it will really fracture the TRUST between him and the GM.

I think the only trust that should exist between him and the GM at this point is the GM trusting him to screw up the game for everyone else.

Never mind confidentiality, Marlowe. Get the old group together electronically or physically and tell "G" he's out by unanimous decision, since he's actively making your game a stressful waste of time.

Then when the new players show up at the next session, "G" just won't be there to fight y'all and scare them away. In fact, if I were one of the newbies, I'd respect and appreciate a group that takes steps to maintain a good game.

[themaque]

Honestly, if he plans on giving the other party members their piece/cut, it sounds like a character decision that isn't very disruptive. I've seen far worse. Bad decision tactically? Maybe.

oh yes, there are much worse he COULD have done. But if the rest of the party has already told him "NO, we want to return it" than him selling it at a pittance just so he could sell it IS disruptive.

Perfectly in character, but that doesn't mean it's not disruptive. As my own example of my poor playing one day shows.

[LooseCannoneer]

Isn't G the one who would DEMAND to have things and threaten other party members with violence if he didn't get his way?

ETA: There's probably a spell that can restore the bracelet to it's original condition, assuming it's completely mundane. But throwing G's character under the bus instead of using the magical equivalent of ctrl-Z.

No, that was my group's previous duplicate of G.

Honestly, all I can recommend for G is to

1) Alert the person who owns it.

2) Tell G to go to a bar.

3) Ask them what their going price for bounties is, and if they want him dead or alive.

4) Find G and kill him before the town guards arrest him for G's shenanigans.

[johnbragg]

oh yes, there are much worse he COULD have done. But if the rest of the party has already told him "NO, we want to return it" than him selling it at a pittance just so he could sell it IS disruptive.

Perfectly in character, but that doesn't mean it's not disruptive. As my own example of my poor playing one day shows.

Not to mention G's inability to remember how many party members there were.

It's apparently in character (I say apparently, because G's character probably has better Int and Wis than G does.) It's also in character for the rest of the party to deal with G as they deal with anyone who would steal their loot and get them in trouble with the authorities. If an NPC traveling with the party had done this, most parties would travel to the ends of the Material Plane and beyond to wreak vengeance.

And I was thinking about your story.
It WAS funny when the Bard tricked you into thinking that there were wyverns to kill.
When the bard teased you for missing, that wasn't really funny.
When you planted an axe in the bard, that was hilarious.

[themaque]

And I was thinking about your story.
It WAS funny when the Bard tricked you into thinking that there were wyverns to kill.
When the bard teased you for missing, that wasn't really funny.
When you planted an axe in the bard, that was hilarious.

Yeah, I should have let it stop there.

To give additional context, the guy playing the Druid was a frienemy who really knew how to egg me on.

[Gritmonger]

Hello, I'm Gritmonger - and I'm a Terrible, Terrible player.

It all started when I figured out how to make a person that could get strength damage (in 2nd edition) on a thrown weapon. Then discovered shuriken. Then discovered small shuriken. Then discovered the additional attack for ranged. Then discovered that you could use two-handed with thrown weapons.

Cut to the point where I show up in the game throwing 10 1d2+Str shuriken per round... at first level.


I didn't let it stop me there, however.

Then I ran a Chaotic Neutral Dwarf Fighter who sniffed. Everything. At every point in the campaign. In every room we entered.

But still I had not learned my lesson.

I got a Paladin. And I hear you saying "Brother, no! You did not make that sin!"

Yes, I did.

I did not Lawful Stupid, but rather I abused the at-will power law to detect evil. Everywhere. At all times. Every time - like the sniffing, but worse.

Then I did DM for others, and lo, I was enlightened.

[comicshorse]

Hallelujah ! :smallcool:

[themaque]

Preach on brother!

[goto124]

No, that was my group's previous duplicate of G.

Honestly, all I can recommend for G is to

1) Alert the person who owns it.

2) Tell G to go to a bar.

3) Ask them what their going price for bounties is, and if they want him dead or alive.

4) Find G and kill him before the town guards arrest him for G's shenanigans.

I thought you meant G the player.

[HoarsHalberd]

Well my worst player is early me.

So I'm playing d&d for the second time ever and we go into a town who are predominantly cultists. (To the point the criminal attacked our fighter to protect the guard captain.)

Anyway, my character runs a rigged game of cups for a longsword he doesn't care about. Wins, and then is forced to play again when the town turns against him and neutral good half off Gish goes with what they say. So I repeat and someone has actually outdone me and put a coin under the cup.

Then the fight with the guard, the townspeople run to their houses whilst we clean up.

Then I want revenge. I kick in the door of every house looking for the guy who out cheated me. He's not there. So I burn down the town. The kleptomaniac CN rogue burns down the town. Also burning down a huge swathe of the plot hooks by accident. I honestly still feel stupid for this.

[Milo v3]

My worst player was a guy in high-school who "roleplayed" his dwarven cleric by running away every time there was combat, sometimes even running further into the dungeon setting off traps and causing enemies to all be alerted while leaving the rest of the group to actually battle without healing or buffing. When the party eventually rejoined the cleric, a nearby teacher jokingly told us that if we didn't put an arrow in that guy immediately he'd consider putting us on detention.

[Sith_Happens]

When the party eventually rejoined the cleric, a nearby teacher jokingly told us that if we didn't put an arrow in that guy immediately he'd consider putting us on detention.

That teacher gets it.:smallcool:

[(Un)Inspired]

My worst player was a guy in high-school who "roleplayed" his dwarven cleric by running away every time there was combat, sometimes even running further into the dungeon setting off traps and causing enemies to all be alerted while leaving the rest of the group to actually battle without healing or buffing. When the party eventually rejoined the cleric, a nearby teacher jokingly told us that if we didn't put an arrow in that guy immediately he'd consider putting us on detention.

Best story I've read in a while. Short and sweet.

[YossarianLives]

I thought you meant G the player.
That is exactly who he means.

[Earthwalker]

Make Whole will not fix the item if a quarter of it has been sold for scrap. The Viking (generically northern european) tendency to subdivide loot and conquest was a serious problem for them (Remember Canute? Ruled England, and Denmark? Take a look at what happened after he died. While we're on that; look at Charlemagne's sons). And in any event, he did not divide a pile of coins. He destroyed a work of art, ruining all the intrinsic value of the craftsmanship and reducing it to a mess of raw metal.

The analogy I suggested to the DM went like this; "Imagine a painting by a famous artist, worth so much money. Now imagine a scrap of canvas torn from that painting and with half the paint scraped off. Is that scrap worth one-quarter of the whole painting?"

Yes, we were totally at fault for leaving a valuable item in his possession. We were totally at fault for expecting him to have some grasp of common sense, common property, the value of artistry, and the value of having rich and powerful allies as opposed to rich and powerful people with a grudge against us.

Not that there was any possibility of getting it away from him short of beating him up in the street. This is not the issue.

The issue now is how to communicate how much a frustercluck he's made without it turning into a RL fight and scaring off the the new guys.

My solution to your GM and yourself.
People know you have the bracelet, so it might follow the Lord finds out.

When you get back to the town. The guards meet you.
"His Lordship has heard you have come into the procession of a certain bracelet he once owns. You are good people and known to the lord. He wish to offer a reward for its return. If you would follow us to the castle we will make sure you can meet the lord"

This is the point where you can say to G (After all you know nothing)

"See I told you it was a good job keeping the bracelet we are going to get a reward."

Then make sure you and the party go peacefully to the lord.

Gms next bit.

"As you enter the main throne room you feel a spell effect you. This is a common area the Lord hears petitioners and so is of course under the effect of a detect lies (or analysis truth, whatever the spell is called)"

The Lord turns to your character. "I hear you have my bracelet"
You reply "Oh yes we do, we gave it to G for safe keeping" (This reads as true)
The Lord then turns to G "Ahh you have my bracelet please return it to me and I will reward you all handsomely"


It’s at this stage that G and only G will face the consequences s of his actions.

[Milodiah]

That teacher gets it.:smallcool:

Shoulda replaced that guy with the teacher.


I'm currently listening to a Mongoose Traveller podcast, and it slowly gets established through the series that all the players are basically high school AP science teachers. I then realize that I could totally see my high school chemistry teacher doing this kind of thing, and somewhat suspect that he probably does.

[Feddlefew]

I'm currently listening to a Mongoose Traveller podcast, and it slowly gets established through the series that all the players are basically high school AP science teachers. I then realize that I could totally see my high school chemistry teacher doing this kind of thing, and somewhat suspect that he probably does.

Several of my highschool teachers did D&D together, Or at least I think they did, since they all seemed to share the same gaming stories when I did D&D stuff during free time.....

[Sith_Happens]

Not that helping G's character be marginally more effective is necessarily the best idea, but I just remembered that if he takes Weapon Focus (Heavy Repeating Crossbow)* he'll then qualify for Dead Eye (Dragon Compendium) and Crossbow Sniper (PHBII), which would add 1x DEX and 0.5x DEX to his damage, respectively.

...He put his highest score into Strength, didn't he?:smallsigh:

* That phrase was incredibly painful to type.

[Lord Torath]

[CLANG CLANG CLANG]

Update on G! Advice maybe needed!:smalleek:

*snip*I favor Earthwalker's suggestion about throwing G's PC under the bus, using the reward/zone-O-truthiness effect. This may get G to think a bit more carefully about his character's actions.

If that fails to make an impression, I think it's time for this: From the DM Struggle: Finally got one of my players to have Agency (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?404566-DM-Struggle-Finally-got-one-of-my-players-to-have-Agency&p=18990185#post18990185) Thread:
Today I went drinking with some of my other players. Every single one of them said they were hoping I'd kick her out of game. But none of them said they had a problem because they were afraid I'd kick them out instead.

I didn't want to invite her into the group in the first place because she is a friend of one of my exes.

I almost kicked her out twice, but I thought I was biased and at one point personal stuff came up involving one of her family members.

Now I feel like an idiot that I didn't kick her out of the game earlier. All my players were having a horrible time but no one said anything.

luckily we are on the last session of the campaign. Unluckily I ruined the game experience of all of my players in the process.I'd say it's time to tell G he (or she) doesn't fit well with the group.

[Rad Mage]

Not nearly as bad as most of the other examples, but I had one guy who insisted on character concepts that would either require severe houseruling to work or would complain at great length about how we weren't letting him play his character ad were railroading him.

One example was his attempt at recreate the six-string samurai character in a 3.5 game. He wanted to play a bard to emphasize the guitar part. This became a problem when he started complaining about his relatively low BAB and refused to use any bard songs in play because that wasn't his concept and started asking the DM if he could drop bardsong for a bonus to his to-hit bonus.

We offered to let him reroll as a class more suited to his concept but refused to let go of the bard angle because he wanted his character to play the guitar. When I asked him why the guitar was such a sticking point, he said that he wanted to bring his guitar to the meeting so he could play it during the game. At the time we had very limited gaming space and there was no where that a guitar would fit at the table.

When we mentioned this he dropped the concept and rolled a cleric.

[NowhereMan583]

I'm currently listening to a Mongoose Traveller podcast, and it slowly gets established through the series that all the players are basically high school AP science teachers.

I am intrigued -- where might I find this?

[PhallicWarrior]

My only truly TERRIBLE player was J, who was the munchkiniest munchkin who ever munchkin'd...but would never admit it. "It's just basic optimization" he'd say, while building a boring, encounter-trivializing Batman Wizard. When I asked him to pare back the magic>everything he was applying to every single encounter, he was bewildered. Every character he ever made in one of my games, regardless of system, was so overpowered it broke the game, because anything that could challenge him could effectively ignore the other members of the party.

AND HE LOVED MY GAMES. LOVED THEM. I was his favorite GM! I never managed to get him to see why my campaigns with him kept falling apart, either, which killed more than a few really promising RP groups in the crib. I only got rid of him by running a campaign in 4th Edition, which he loathed. ("I can FEEL the lack of options" he said)

[ComaVision]

Red Mage made me think of my brother.

My brother ranges from making quite powerful characters (DMM Persist Cleric) to quite bad characters (Duskblade 4/Slime Lord) and the difference on impact to the game is 0. Regardless of the alignment on his character sheet, he plays Chaotic Stupid. His characters have the highest mortality rate I've seen, to the extent that one session (of approximately six hours) he went through three characters.

Most recently, his Slime Lord was asked to leave a temple tended by Archons because they could tell he was Evil. Instead, he decided he wanted to pretend he was going to leave then dart towards the altar. I didn't see what option I had as DM but to have the Archons to destroy him. He rolled low on initiative and didn't get a chance to act before he was killed, his group did not help him. (The Archons were level appropriate but my brother only had 17 AC, they did not miss.)

Another character: He once made a anthropomorphic frog Sorceror with 8 charisma. Yes, he was unable to cast spells. That character was killed in his sleep by another PC for being utterly useless.

Another character: This one was a kobold Sorceror (with positive Cha and the Leadership feat). We were in a temple and the door to a room was closing. IIRC, the group was 8 players at the time, and all of us EXCEPT my brother stayed back. My brother ended up in a room closed by a stone door with a half dozen slimes (homebrewed by the DM, I think). He cast a spell that does not affect slimes first, while they all surrounded him. Next round, he decided to run through them and achieved death by AoO.

He has an almost uncanny ability to die. He's probably had some 20+ characters so I could go on for a while... (for comparison, I've played 2 characters, excluding one off games)

[Rad Mage]

One time a friend of mine made a homebrew setting for 4e. It was supposed to be a kind of Fantasy novel multiverse mash up where the player characters would be great heroes from other worlds summoned to combat a great evil.

The player I mentioned before was in this group. His "great hero"? A kendo instructor from Japan. Not a fantasy Japan equivalent but real modern day Japan. The act of great heroism that caught the attention of otherworldly forces? His training helped students win a tournament that granted them scholarships for college. His class was warlord.

I should also mention that we were starting at level 5. We were supposed to be level 10 but the process of being pulled into this world drained our powers.

When asked where his 5 levels came from he said that it was from his "heroic spirit".

The DM allowed it mainly because he was a doormat but we ran with it anyway. Then he started making Arcana checks. He offered no explanation of how his character possessed this knowledge. I brought it up with the DM and he told me that he couldn't say much but he had a plan.

The next meeting it was revealed that the kendo instructor was simply acting as a vessel for a myriad of heroic souls who got trapped in his body during the summoning. The player got really quiet for the rest of the session. The next day he called me and started accusing me of forcing the DM to railroad his character and ruining his concept.

The campaign fell apart after that. We've meet up for other games since but the player in question moved to Japan so he became a non-issue after that.

[Inevitability]

One time a friend of mine made a homebrew setting for 4e. It was supposed to be a kind of Fantasy novel multiverse mash up where the player characters would be great heroes from other worlds summoned to combat a great evil.

The player I mentioned before was in this group. His "great hero"? A kendo instructor from Japan. Not a fantasy Japan equivalent but real modern day Japan. The act of great heroism that caught the attention of otherworldly forces? His training helped students win a tournament that granted them scholarships for college. His class was warlord.

I should also mention that we were starting at level 5. We were supposed to be level 10 but the process of being pulled into this world drained our powers.

When asked where his 5 levels came from he said that it was from his "heroic spirit".

The DM allowed it mainly because he was a doormat but we ran with it anyway. Then he started making Arcana checks. He offered no explanation of how his character possessed this knowledge. I brought it up with the DM and he told me that he couldn't say much but he had a plan.

The next meeting it was revealed that the kendo instructor was simply acting as a vessel for a myriad of heroic souls who got trapped in his body during the summoning. The player got really quiet for the rest of the session. The next day he called me and started accusing me of forcing the DM to railroad his character and ruining his concept.

The campaign fell apart after that. We've meet up for other games since but the player in question moved to Japan so he became a non-issue after that.

To be honest, this one was partially the DM's fault. Drastically altering a character's backstory without that player's consent? I think my group would kick that guy out without thinking twice.

[Gilphon]

Also, I think that sounds like an entertaining character concept, if the player is self-aware enough to make it work. Like, the idea could be that the spirits got a little confused and misinterpreted his 'act of great heroism'. Roleplay him as a guy who has no idea what's going on, and reacts to magic with some form of gaping disbelief. Build him as a Lazylord, so basically his contribution to battle is to stand at the back and shout encouraging things at everyone else. Embrace the silliness inherent in Martial Healing.

Though, I mean, I don't know why he was trying to make Arcana checks, especially since that's not even a class skill for Warlords.

[Rad Mage]

To be honest, this one was partially the DM's fault. Drastically altering a character's backstory without that player's consent? I think my group would kick that guy out without thinking twice.

But his backstory wasn't altered in any way. He was still the Kendo instructor from Japan. He was just given an explanation as to why someone with no real combat experience form Earth was able to effectively lead and advise a group of seasoned veterans and identify the weaknesses of demons and elementals that he's never seen before.

EDIT: I should add that he refused to roleplay his concept. He never responded to the weirdness he was suddenly thrust into. He had no issues or concerns about being drafted into a cosmic conflict where his allies included two dragonborn and a vryloka. The closest he got to roleplaying was making out of context refenerences to cell phones and the like.

[Mr Beer]

If I had enough of a problem with the concept to retroactively change it without talking to the player, I would just ban it to start with. Also, I think it's an odd idea but I don't hate it. Maybe he's the kendo-ist among many kendo guys.

Arcana is dubious, the DM should have reviewed his sheet though for anachronisms, if he's concerned about such stuff.

[Rad Mage]

Maybe he's the kendo-ist among many kendo guys.

The sad thing is he wasn't. He went on at length about how he wanted to be the "everyman" member of the group. About how they make the best stories and there wasn't anything special about him at all. The DM and the other members of the party repeatedly pointed out that that didn't explain how he gained FIVE levels out of thin air.

The supposed "retcon" was to explain where those levels came from.

This doesn't change the fact that he didn't go after the DM. He came after me and told me I was being rude by asking where his power came from.

[Milodiah]

I am intrigued -- where might I find this?

It's called Close the Airlock, and if you can get past the audio-quality issues in the first few episodes (including a crying baby at a few points) it's pretty good.

[Anonymouswizard]

The sad thing is he wasn't. He went on at length about how he wanted to be the "everyman" member of the group. About how they make the best stories and there wasn't anything special about him at all. The DM and the other members of the party repeatedly pointed out that that didn't explain how he gained FIVE levels out of thin air.

To be fair, he's sometimes right, in my Unknown Armies game the relatively normal member had second most interesting story in-game, and actually had an explanation for where her skills came from. But the thing is, the story was only so interesting because there was something special about her, while 'kendo guy' sounds like he was adventuring with people who used to be on the level of Gilgamesh and Cuchullain, and decided it was best for him to order them around, while showing knowledge that an ordinary person wouldn't have. He seems to want two things at once.


The supposed "retcon" was to explain where those levels came from.

This doesn't change the fact that he didn't go after the DM. He came after me and told me I was being rude by asking where his power came from.

Well it is obviously bad and wrong to question things that don't make sense, you never make progress that way. It's such a shame that he reacted to you in that way though, as the new backstory seems to be a great way to weave the everyman in, confused by this stuff that he suddenly knows, and wondering where his strength came from. But of course, you have to run this past the player first, but it sounds like the character had to be redesigned or retired, or he'd be what I refer to as 'genre-breaking' (destroying suspension of disbelief by being from a different genre).

[Rad Mage]

Well it is obviously bad and wrong to question things that don't make sense, you never make progress that way. It's such a shame that he reacted to you in that way though, as the new backstory seems to be a great way to weave the everyman in, confused by this stuff that he suddenly knows, and wondering where his strength came from. But of course, you have to run this past the player first, but it sounds like the character had to be redesigned or retired, or he'd be what I refer to as 'genre-breaking' (destroying suspension of disbelief by being from a different genre).

We tried to talk to him a bout it multiple times. The problem is less to do with the concept and more to do with him as a person. He's not happy unless everyone is praising how cool his character is. If you disagree with him on anything he calls you names I can't repeat on this board. Letting the character run as is was an olive branch but it was made clear to him that the character was thematically inappropriate but his response was akin to "deal with it".

He comes up with concepts but gives no thought to how they would actually work, and when they don't work out like he hopes he blames everyone else for not playing along even when we did.

[Anonymouswizard]

We tried to talk to him a bout it multiple times. The problem is less to do with the concept and more to do with him as a person. He's not happy unless everyone is praising how cool his character is. If you disagree with him on anything he calls you names I can't repeat on this board. Letting the character run as is was an olive branch but it was made clear to him that the character was thematically inappropriate but his response was akin to "deal with it".

He comes up with concepts but gives no thought to how they would actually work, and when they don't work out like he hopes he blames everyone else for not playing along even when we did.

I kind of pegged as that, I know someone who has the same view on playstyles (if you aren't in it for the combat then stand aside because combat is the important part. Don't like combat? Deal with it), and I've found the only way to deal with it is to play in different groups.

But yeah, I have some words to say about this guy, many would be block by this forum's filter, so my question is, how does he manage to expect this when his character is effectively the exact opposite of cool?

[Rad Mage]

I kind of pegged as that, I know someone who has the same view on playstyles (if you aren't in it for the combat then stand aside because combat is the important part. Don't like combat? Deal with it), and I've found the only way to deal with it is to play in different groups.

But yeah, I have some words to say about this guy, many would be block by this forum's filter, so my question is, how does he manage to expect this when his character is effectively the exact opposite of cool?

Boils down to basic narcissim really. He is incapable of stepping outside of his own head and seeing how his behavior affects other people, emphasized by his habit of clipping his toenails whenever he came over and not even having the decency to clean up after himself.

If he thinks it's cool EVERYONE should think it's cool. And if you don't you're just being narrow minded and rude.

[Anxe]

Boils down to basic narcissim really. He is incapable of stepping outside of his own head and seeing how his behavior affects other people, emphasized by his habit of clipping his toenails whenever he came over and not even having the decency to clean up after himself.

If he thinks it's cool EVERYONE should think it's cool. And if you don't you're just being narrow minded and rude.

https://chloeannjacobs.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/ew-face.gif

[Malak'ai]

I'd like to add a little more on G.

Once again, I'm the DM in this particular game (Yay me! :smallmad:)

Anyway.... Here we go.


I'd love to see what he does in any system apart from D&D. I'd assume that as long as you were pink mohawking he'd be great in Shadowrun...

Oh no... Not in the name of the 9 Hell's am I going to be around to try an explain to him the machanic's of SR.
He can't even add up his Repeating Xbow attack bonus properly at lvl 3, imagine him trying to work out Combat Pool/Dodge Pool/what ever in SR?


G sounds very much like he'd benefit from playing 4e, from what I hear essentials provides some very good options for simple characters who fight well. Other than that or going back to AD&D I can't see how roleplaying is particularly good for him. If you can get him to a point where he's playing a character who isn't the load though, I have a feeling that he'll become one of the best players in the game (but not the best, that goes to someone with better acting).

Nope. We tried. His FIGHTER was being out damaged by my Warlock... Yeah... Tantrums away!


HA, good one. No, this is definitely the guy who would neither know nor care what the "Defender" tag on 4e's Fighter class means, choose powers based solely on how much damage they deal, and then only ever use basic attacks anyways.

This is exactly what happened.


Sorry, I must be overestimating G's intelligence. Does he understand what 'this class focuses on making very powerful hits with his weapon. He doesn't have to do anything else in combat but pick the enemy he wants to whack and whack it.'

If that's beyond him then I'm sorry, the only player I've known who seems to have the exact same goal as G can actually build a character. He'll just a) refuse to build a useful wizard because 'if I'm playing a wizard it's to get the blasty spells' then get's annoyed when a semi-optimised fighter gets in the way of his spells.

My reasoning goes: G sounds like someone who can spell his own name and do basic maths. This means he must be able to add up the results of his build choices (which may be the flaw in my logic here) to get accurate attack, damage, and defences. However, basic algebra seems to be beyond him. Thus he may be a decent contributor if given a class that doesn't have to make decisions such as 'power attack or not power attack' while the rest of the group can play essentials or AEDU characters as they see fit. I do not expect him to make competent build choices, and so suggested a system with a smaller gap between low op and high op.

I can see why a bad experience might make someone not want to touch a game though. How much are we limited to D&D? Because my next suggestion would be to try Mutants and Masterminds, except that it's classless and I'm assuming that G would be lost without a fighter class. I know I probably wouldn't be playing with him at this point though.

Now, don't get me wrong, outside of the game, G is a very intelligent person, though maybe quite low on the wisdom and charisma side of things.
It's just that he doesn't bother actually spending the time learning the rules of ANY game he plays, and he always plays the same character; although his actual build might be different he always plays the "out for myself, loud, brash, obnoxious BDF who thinks that he can get away with anything without being held responsable.


You have just described my worst nightmare :smalleek: I really do not know why anyone is still playing with him, despite him sounding like a great looney. I've never known anyone to be so bad with the rules.

Has he ever meaningfully interacted with someone who's LGBT? What gives him the right to use that as an insult? He'd have been out of my circle of friends at the drop of a hat :smalleek:

So he can't understand something clearly spelt out? This makes me wonder if he's just using the game as an 'acceptable outlet for violence'. And he's fine as long as someone else handles the crunch? How bearable was he in the C&S games? was there any real difference?

We try not to play with him... But sometimes we can't avoid it.

As to if he's spent time with LGBT people, I have no idea. Somehow thought, I don't think so, seeing as he's still alive. His views on homosexual males are very clear, and not very nice, while his views on lesbians is well.... Let's just not get into it.

As to him understanding things that are clearly laid out, let me reitterate what Marlowe and I have said already, he doesn't even bother learning the rules of the game, so even if you made him a paint-by-numbers character with the most basic instructions of how to play them effectivly, he'd still run off into the bushes to "flank" 40 Goblins while wearing scale mail, having a Dex of 12 and no ranks in Hide or Move Silently and throw a hissyfit when you tell him all the Goblins are now lining him up with their shortbows.


Never mind gaming with him, why do you still associate with this guy? The reasonable approach would be to run in the other direction at the sight of him!

I personally haven't intentually had anything to do with him outside of this game for over 2 years because of him insulting me personally in a very foul way.

As to why he's in the game, well we had a new player and I wanted a full table, not just Marlowe, myself and D, so I had both Marlowe and D invite him. Now let me make this clear, he was NOT my first choice, nor even the second.
The only reason he's at the table is because the 3 other people I asked said they couldn't join, so that left me with only one ofter option... Have a 3 person party, which I had already told the new player I wanted to try to avoid.

[Arbane]

The only reason he's at the table is because the 3 other people I asked said they couldn't join, so that left me with only one ofter option... Have a 3 person party, which I had already told the new player I wanted to try to avoid.

I am reasonably certain you will quickly realize you would've been better off with a three person party.

[Mr Beer]

I'd take a 1 person party over a 4 person party composed of 3 normal people and one raging douchebag.

[Malak'ai]

I am reasonably certain you will quickly realize you would've been better off with a three person party.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Though I did make it clear when I asked D to invite him that I didn't want any of his usual BS, but I guess that was too much to ask.

Depending on how things turn out in the next couple of sessions, I may be forced to ask him to leave.

[Marlowe]

You know that part of the brain that allows you to differentiate between what you'd like to think and what's actually true? G doesn't seem to have such a thing.

Anyway, if [certain other player that isn't G] is so keen on having a character named "Deuce X McKenna", I'd like to reserve the name "Anne de Climax".

I'll recommend "Dutch Angle" and "Modesty Bedsheet" for the other guys.:smallsmile:

[Kish]

As to if he's spent time with LGBT people, I have no idea. Somehow thought, I don't think so, seeing as he's still alive. His views on homosexual males are very clear, and not very nice, while his views on lesbians is well.... Let's just not get into it.
[...]
I personally haven't intentually had anything to do with him outside of this game for over 2 years because of him insulting me personally in a very foul way.

As to why he's in the game, well we had a new player and I wanted a full table, not just Marlowe, myself and D, so I had both Marlowe and D invite him. Now let me make this clear, he was NOT my first choice, nor even the second.
The only reason he's at the table is because the 3 other people I asked said they couldn't join, so that left me with only one ofter option... Have a 3 person party, which I had already told the new player I wanted to try to avoid.
At this point, I'm going, "You have fifteen strikes already! Why is the coach not making you put the bat down?" My advice is to tell him he's uninvited for being a horrible person and retcon the (intact) bracelet into another PC's possession. The IC problem is the least important problem with G (and "you roleplay badly and self-indulgently" is so far down the list of reasons not to spend time with this guy it's not on the page), so don't deal with it IC.

[illyahr]

At this point, I'm going, "You have fifteen strikes already! Why is the coach not making you put the bat down?" My advice is to tell him he's uninvited for being a horrible person and retcon the (intact) bracelet into another PC's possession. The IC problem is the least important problem with G (and "you roleplay badly and self-indulgently" is so far down the list of reasons not to spend time with this guy it's not on the page), so don't deal with it IC.

This. Soooo much this. This guy should never be an option, no matter how many players you are short. I've run some good games with only three other people. The only reason you would need four is if you used the CR in Dungeons and Dragons and CR never works out properly anyway.

[Milodiah]

You want four players?

Glue a magic 8-ball to the front of a vacuum cleaner, then put a character sheet in front of it.

Boom. Better player than...at least 10% of actual humans.

[Solaris]

You want four players?

Glue a magic 8-ball to the front of a vacuum cleaner, then put a character sheet in front of it.

Boom. Better player than...at least 10% of actual humans.

More easily predicted, too. There is an upper limit to the stupidity the Magic 8-Ball is capable of.

Humans do not share this limitation.

[Marlowe]

During a previous campaign, we actually considered making a "G table" that we would roll on to run his character when the guy wasn't there to actually play.

It would have entries like:
1: Threaten random NPC.
2: Threaten random fellow PC.
3: Drop weapon.
4: Spend whole round changing weapon (rules on drawing weapons notwithstand).
5: If a female is present; make sexist remark. If no females are present; insinuate other PC is gay.
6: Assault random person.
7: Attempt to pick random person's pockets in full view of everyone...

Yeah, you get the idea. I still think it would probably be indistinguishable from the real G.

The problem isn't lack of native intelligence. It's really more that rather than considering different possibilities and options he latches onto the first idea in his head and attempts to warp reality to make it work. And he ain't no Haruhi. He also doesn't listen to other people at all, and has a whole lot of issues that weigh his judgement in disastrous ways.

Specifically in this case, I'm pretty sure this business with smashing the bracelet is all about getting his payback on the NPC. Because her existence offends him. She's a powerful woman, and that can't stand. Real men don't stand for chicks getting to tell folks what to do. So he's-a gonna smash the bracelet she commissioned for her daughter while she's on another continent. That'll show her he's a Man. Yessirrighty it will.

[Milodiah]

More easily predicted, too. There is an upper limit to the stupidity the Magic 8-Ball is capable of.

Humans do not share this limitation.

*shakeshakeshakeshakeshake*

"I smack the king with my battleaxe."

Damn.

[Marlowe]

Yeah, G would be more like to "smack" the king with his bare hands, get AoEd into oblivion by the royal guard, scream for an hour about how "stupid" it is that he can't punch people without people hitting him back, then complain that he's in prison because the rest of the party didn't "help" him fight everyone else, and attempt to buy his freedom by claiming the rest of the party were in on the "plot" and offering to turn king's evidence against them.

Then he'll demand a reward for turning king's evidence, and when it's explained to him that it doesn't work like that he'll start "smacking" people again. Back to square one.

He'd be called a Murderhobo if he was any good at hurting things.

[Malak'ai]

He'd be called a Murderhobo if he was any good at hurting things.

He is good at hurting things though.... Friendships, relationships, feelings and other peoples sanity :smalltongue:.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'd like to add a little more on G.

Once again, I'm the DM in this particular game (Yay me! :smallmad:)

Anyway.... Here we go.



Oh no... Not in the name of the 9 Hell's am I going to be around to try an explain to him the machanic's of SR.
He can't even add up his Repeating Xbow attack bonus properly at lvl 3, imagine him trying to work out Combat Pool/Dodge Pool/what ever in SR?[/QUOTE

4e/5e makes it easier, but I actually agree. I meant to suggest the style more than the rules, and even then, I'm now doubting that.

[QUOTE]Nope. We tried. His FIGHTER was being out damaged by my Warlock... Yeah... Tantrums away!



This is exactly what happened.

I feel stupid now, although I know this is mostly on G's head, just for suggesting something that could be any more complex than a 3e fighter.


Now, don't get me wrong, outside of the game, G is a very intelligent person, though maybe quite low on the wisdom and charisma side of things.
It's just that he doesn't bother actually spending the time learning the rules of ANY game he plays, and he always plays the same character; although his actual build might be different he always plays the "out for myself, loud, brash, obnoxious BDF who thinks that he can get away with anything without being held responsable.

Why oh way are you still playing with him.


We try not to play with him... But sometimes we can't avoid it.

As to if he's spent time with LGBT people, I have no idea. Somehow thought, I don't think so, seeing as he's still alive. His views on homosexual males are very clear, and not very nice, while his views on lesbians is well.... Let's just not get into it.

Considering that I'm getting stuff that rhymes with 'wevil' and 'lot', I'd like to just say that this is what would have made me kick him out of the group. And I've never kicked a player out of a group.


As to him understanding things that are clearly laid out, let me reitterate what Marlowe and I have said already, he doesn't even bother learning the rules of the game, so even if you made him a paint-by-numbers character with the most basic instructions of how to play them effectivly, he'd still run off into the bushes to "flank" 40 Goblins while wearing scale mail, having a Dex of 12 and no ranks in Hide or Move Silently and throw a hissyfit when you tell him all the Goblins are now lining him up with their shortbows.

I've seen the person, A, who'll waste 15 minutes every combat round trying to convince the GM to do exactly what he wants to do, while the rest of use spend about a minute unless we get vetoed on most ideas, and GM seems worse. I'm now happy that I'll only have to deal with A in my prospective Vampire (do not play with G) game.


I personally haven't intentually had anything to do with him outside of this game for over 2 years because of him insulting me personally in a very foul way.

As to why he's in the game, well we had a new player and I wanted a full table, not just Marlowe, myself and D, so I had both Marlowe and D invite him. Now let me make this clear, he was NOT my first choice, nor even the second.
The only reason he's at the table is because the 3 other people I asked said they couldn't join, so that left me with only one ofter option... Have a 3 person party, which I had already told the new player I wanted to try to avoid.

I can understand most of this, but I can see you won't make the mistake of inviting him again.

[Sith_Happens]

I'd like to add a little more on G.

Once again, I'm the DM in this particular game (Yay me! :smallmad:)

http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/files/2013/07/Im-so-so-sorry.gif


This is exactly what happened.

Not sure if I should feel good about being right.


As to why he's in the game, well we had a new player and I wanted a full table, not just Marlowe, myself and D, so I had both Marlowe and D invite him. Now let me make this clear, he was NOT my first choice, nor even the second.
The only reason he's at the table is because the 3 other people I asked said they couldn't join, so that left me with only one ofter option... Have a 3 person party, which I had already told the new player I wanted to try to avoid.

Congratulations, I'd hazard a guess that by now you've quite well taught a newbie that meeting an arbitrary headcount quota is to be prioritized over playing with people you don't want to stab in real life.:smallannoyed:

[comicshorse]

It's fairly minor compared to some horror stories but I'll tell you about P (name changed to protect the guilty)
Its a 'Shadowrun' game set in Germany and the group come across the lair of a 'Silver Warrior' an elite order of Vampires who briefly ruled Germany in the chaos after the Eurowars (in the G.M.'s Shadowrun anyway)
Its fairly heavily defended by mortals so we begin to discuss how to crack it and get to the vampire (there being a hefty reward for Vampires in Germany for obvious reasons)
P suggests he recce the place and we agree and so he sneaks down to the building and around the back and then knocks on the door and asks to be taken to the Vampire !
He is stripped of weapons by the goons and taken to the Vampire by a squad of heavily armed goons. Upon meeting the Vampire he doesn't ask for anything he simply informs him that we're about to attack and about our capabilities (much of which he gets wrong).
Vampire listens carefully and then kills him ( P is alone and unarmed and surrounded by goons so this is pretty easy) meaning we are now facing a group on full alert and a fully powered up Vampire !
To this day I have no idea what P was thinking, he didn't ask for money from the Vampire, assuming he was stupid enough to trust the Vampire whose power he had just utterly put himself in. The only thing I can think is he thought the attack on the Vampire would be suicide but if that was the case why didn't he simply walk away ?

For the record we attacked the building and killed most of the security and didn't lose anybody but the alerted Vampire got away in a sunproof vehicle driven by one of his minions

[Feddlefew]

*shakeshakeshakeshakeshake*

"I smack the king with my battleaxe."

Damn.

"But the king isn't even on this continent and you're duel wielding whips!"

[Rad Mage]

This one is a different fellow than the one I've been previously ranting about.

He joined our group halfway through a campaign, so naturally we met him in a tavern.

The second he is introduced he starts hitting on the waitresses. When we stress the importance of our mission and that we should get going his response was, and I quote, "Nobody is leaving this tavern until I get laid!"

[MReav]

This one is a different fellow than the one I've been previously ranting about.

He joined our group halfway through a campaign, so naturally we met him in a tavern.

The second he is introduced he starts hitting on the waitresses. When we stress the importance of our mission and that we should get going his response was, and I quote, "Nobody is leaving this tavern until I get laid!"

Some part of me thinks that the response should be the ugliest, burliest PC in the group walks up to him threatens to give him a handjob.

[Rad Mage]

Some part of me thinks that the response should be that the ugliest, burliest PC in the group threatens to give him a handjob.

We totally should have done that! I am storing that one away for future reference.

[Mr Beer]

"The half-orc gives you a terrifying, sandpapery handjob with his calloused, battle-scarred sword-hand. You are too scared to resist. As you finish with a whimper, the tavern patrons are frantically staring at the walls, ceiling, fireplace etc., anything rather than the shameful scene being enacted in front of them. You may then shuffle out in silence."

[MReav]

Mr Beer, you have a demented mind.

I salute you.

[Kalmageddon]

"The half-orc gives you a terrifying, sandpapery handjob with his calloused, battle-scarred sword-hand. You are too scared to resist. As you finish with a whimper, the tavern patrons are frantically staring at the walls, ceiling, fireplace etc., anything rather than the shameful scene being enacted in front of them. You may then shuffle out in silence."

I am going to immortalize the perfection of this joke in my mind so that it lives on after it has been scrubbed by a mod for being terribily nsfw.
*takes screenshots with teary eyes*

[Sith_Happens]

"The half-orc gives you a terrifying, sandpapery handjob with his calloused, battle-scarred sword-hand. You are too scared to resist. As you finish with a whimper, the tavern patrons are frantically staring at the walls, ceiling, fireplace etc., anything rather than the shameful scene being enacted in front of them. You may then shuffle out in silence."

On the one hand, the socially conscious part of me is painfully aware that had this been about a female PC we'd all be flipping a **** instead of laughing our asses off and nothing good can come of that sort of double standard existing.

On the other hand, it really is freaking hilarious.:smallbiggrin:

[MReav]

We totally should have done that! I am storing that one away for future reference.

Be sure to relate to us the story if that happens.

PM us if it's too NSFW.

[goto124]

On the one hand, the socially conscious part of me is painfully aware that had this been about a female PC we'd all be flipping a **** instead of laughing our asses off and nothing good can come of that sort of double standard existing.

On the other hand, it really is freaking hilarious.:smallbiggrin:

Why not both?

[Sith_Happens]

Why not both?

Well said. Personally I long for a world where equal-opportunity offending is truly a thing.:smallwink:

[MReav]

"Ahright, let's get dis show on da road."

"But... but you're a dude!"

"Grog not picky."


"The half-orc gives you a terrifying, sandpapery handjob with his calloused, battle-scarred sword-hand. You are too scared to resist. As you finish with a whimper, the tavern patrons are frantically staring at the walls, ceiling, fireplace etc., anything rather than the shameful scene being enacted in front of them. You may then shuffle out in silence."

[Rad Mage]

Be sure to relate to us the story if that happens.

PM us if it's too NSFW.

Sadly this is not likely to happen as I don't play in the same group as him anymore. Though I can recall the time he attempted to recruit me into a campaign he was running in his super cool custom setting.

We were told that we would begin the campaign in "The Town of Beginnings". Every other major city in the world was named after a porn star. Every homebrew race he saw on the DnD wiki was a canon part of his world but Halflings were banned.

"So it's a comedy game?" I asked.

"Nah, man. I have a totally serious epic story planned." He responded.

"Oh... Shame I have work on those nights."

[johnbragg]

"Ahright, let's get dis show on da road."

"But... but you're a dude!"

"Grog not picky."

"Dat 2 gold pieces. Grog member of guild. You pay now."

[Kish]

On the one hand, the socially conscious part of me is painfully aware that had this been about a female PC we'd all be flipping a **** instead of laughing our asses off and nothing good can come of that sort of double standard existing.

On the other hand, it really is freaking hilarious.:smallbiggrin:
If someone (whether the player was male or female) playing a female PC said "Nobody is leaving the tavern until I get laid!"...while that might change the situation, I think few people would suggest it was more appropriate or less mock-worthy.

[MReav]

"Dat 2 gold pieces. Grog member of guild. You pay now."

"Grog not some two-copper hussy, Grog high-class call boy."

[illyahr]

"Grog not some two-copper hussy, Grog high-class call boy."

Ok. This here? This is where I lost it. Can I sig this? :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

[MReav]

Ok. This here? This is where I lost it. Can I sig this? :smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

It might need a little context but sure.

[Rad Mage]

"Grog not some two-copper hussy, Grog high-class call boy."

Brilliant. Mind if I sig?

[MReav]

"Grog not some two-copper hussy, Grog high-class call boy."

Anyone wanting to sig can.

[Basilisk010]

I think this might've been me.
I played D&D exactly once with one other person. We both wanted to have characters, so we both made one and both acted as GM. That actually worked okay somehow.
Also, I couldn't decide between Sorcerer and Bard, so I just took "half a level of each". At level 1. Yeah.
There was some sort of evil innkeeper we didn't know what to do with, so we just had him get sucked into an event horizon that only existed to him somehow. That actually ended up being sort of cool. "The innkeeper's face contorts into an expression of horror right before he stops moving. He is frozen slightly above the ground, and upon attempting to touch his body there is no tactile input, as if he does not exist at all. The man's immaterial body slowly becomes increasingly red-shifted in color before disappearing altogether."

[ComaVision]

I think this might've been me.
I played D&D exactly once with one other person. We both wanted to have characters, so we both made one and both acted as GM. That actually worked okay somehow.
Also, I couldn't decide between Sorcerer and Bard, so I just took "half a level of each". At level 1. Yeah.
There was some sort of evil innkeeper we didn't know what to do with, so we just had him get sucked into an event horizon that only existed to him somehow. That actually ended up being sort of cool. "The innkeeper's face contorts into an expression of horror right before he stops moving. He is frozen slightly above the ground, and upon attempting to touch his body there is no tactile input, as if he does not exist at all. The man's immaterial body slowly becomes increasingly red-shifted in color before disappearing altogether."

Mechanically, I have no idea how any of this happened. Was it essentially just freeform roleplay?

[Basilisk010]

Mechanically, I have no idea how any of this happened. Was it essentially just freeform roleplay?

Pretty much, yeah. Part of it had something to do with 'I'm the GM so I can change the game however I want!' mindset we both had.

[KillianHawkeye]

Also, I couldn't decide between Sorcerer and Bard, so I just took "half a level of each". At level 1. Yeah.

There was actually an optional rule for that in 3rd Edition.

[Inevitability]

Hey everyone! Remember S? Yeah, he reached new levels of terribleness.

S had changed characters yet again. His min-maxed warforged barbarian was taken care off (read: I had the main villain finish him off) and S presented his new character: a min-maxed elf wizard (supposedly LG).

Now, this went all right for the first few sessions. S casually tagged along with the party, throwing Fireballs, Banishments and Water Breathings around where they were needed. He even managed to make a 'flying carpet' out of some Unseen Servants, saving both himself and the kobold the party had adopted from drowning in a storm.

Then, things went south. The first that happened was that S found out a major NPC in this plot arc was a vampire. Ever since the end of last session, he's been going on about how awesome it'd be if he became a vampire too. I explained to him that (in 5e) a vampire can only grow from a vampire spawn who is given freedom by it's master, which did shut him up for a few minutes. S then proceeded to settle for being a free-willed vampire spawn.

This lead into an hour-long debate on whether or not vampires are always LE, whether or not vampire spawn are always NE, and whether or not a LG person who willingly becomes an Evil creature that has to make others suffer to survive can remain good. I hate racial alignments, I really do, and I felt bad over having to use them to scare S away.

Another problem is that the NPC in question sees undeath as an extraordinary blessing, something few are given and even less deserve. When I informed S of this fact, he told me I was 'railroading' him, followed by him proclaiming he had another plan anyway. The way he described this was, I kid you not:


S: I already have a plan. A LE plan.
Me: Should I be worried?
S: Yes. Muwahahaha!

So now I am half-curious, half-fearful to what the next session will bring. Man, do I hate S sometimes. :smallannoyed:

[Lord Torath]

Hey everyone! Remember S? Yeah, he reached new levels of terribleness.

S had changed characters yet again. His min-maxed warforged barbarian was taken care off (read: I had the main villain finish him off) and S presented his new character: a min-maxed elf wizard (supposedly LG).

Now, this went all right for the first few sessions. S casually tagged along with the party, throwing Fireballs, Banishments and Water Breathings around where they were needed. He even managed to make a 'flying carpet' out of some Unseen Servants, saving both himself and the kobold the party had adopted from drowning in a storm.

Then, things went south. The first that happened was that S found out a major NPC in this plot arc was a vampire. Ever since the end of last session, he's been going on about how awesome it'd be if he became a vampire too. I explained to him that (in 5e) a vampire can only grow from a vampire spawn who is given freedom by it's master, which did shut him up for a few minutes. S then proceeded to settle for being a free-willed vampire spawn.

This lead into an hour-long debate on whether or not vampires are always LE, whether or not vampire spawn are always NE, and whether or not a LG person who willingly becomes an Evil creature that has to make others suffer to survive can remain good. I hate racial alignments, I really do, and I felt bad over having to use them to scare S away.

Another problem is that the NPC in question sees undeath as an extraordinary blessing, something few are given and even less deserve. When I informed S of this fact, he told me I was 'railroading' him, followed by him proclaiming he had another plan anyway. The way he described this was, I kid you not:

<snip>

So now I am half-curious, half-fearful to what the next session will bring. Man, do I hate S sometimes. :smallannoyed:

Wait, so you're Railroading him by preventing him from playing a Vampire? :smallsigh: When he shows up with a plan to get the NPC to Vamp him, have it break his neck instead, and toss his body to the ghouls.

[Gizmogidget]

Sorry I don't know how to spoiler so you will have to deal with the block of text.

We will call my worst player OJ, and comparatively to the other stories on this thread I would say that she is pretty good. However OJ's problems lie in three categories. She will only play druid characters and ranger characters. This stems from her lifelong dream of being a marine biologist. However because she can never seem to focus her attention on learning the rules, she never understands tactics. For example for a very long time when we used to play AD&D 2nd edition, she constantly was using her bow, even if the enemy was right in front of her, and when she had a long sword on hand. This caused many problems because no matter how many times here bow was broken she wouldn't learn. Later I decided to DM 5th edition, and she chose a druid. I ended up having to build her character and supply spells. I explained all the spells general effects to her without being overly detailed. It was horrible, because she never knew what spells to cast, and took a more melee like stance. This was bad because her character had a whip and could only deal 1d4+1 damage each turn. She also finds herself incapable of roleplaying and never speaks IC, and her characters do nothing but what the leader does, sort of like a golem. Her final offense is that she almost never pays attention to any of the story and constantly needs recaps from other players. However she shows redeeming qualities as she enjoys the game very much, but I would guess she feels overwhelmed (still) by the rulebooks.

[KillianHawkeye]

Sorry I don't know how to spoiler so you will have to deal with the block of text.

Sorry to be That Guy, but what does your lack of knowledge about SPOILER tags have to do with your unwillingness to use proper line breaks? They seem entirely unrelated to me.... :smallconfused::smalltongue:

[johnbragg]

Sorry I don't know how to spoiler so you will have to deal with the block of text.

. However because she can never seem to focus her attention on learning the rules, she never understands tactics. For example for a very long time when we used to play AD&D 2nd edition, she constantly was using her bow, even if the enemy was right in front of her, and when she had a long sword on hand. This caused many problems because no matter how many times here bow was broken she wouldn't learn. Later I decided to DM 5th edition, and she chose a druid. I ended up having to build her character and supply spells. I explained all the spells general effects to her without being overly detailed. It was horrible, because she never knew what spells to cast, and took a more melee like stance. This was bad because her character had a whip and could only deal 1d4+1 damage each turn. She also finds herself incapable of roleplaying and never speaks IC, and her characters do nothing but what the leader does, sort of like a golem. Her final offense is that she almost never pays attention to any of the story and constantly needs recaps from other players. However she shows redeeming qualities as she enjoys the game very much, but I would guess she feels overwhelmed (still) by the rulebooks.

Tactically, maybe you could help her out (more) by giving her 4 options, melee attack, ranged attack and maybe 2 go-to spells? She'd still be limited, way underperforming her class and role, but that would reduce the game's complexity for her to the level of an Xbox controller (A, B, C, X). I don't know the 5th edition druid spells, but I think she could handle a combat plan of Step 1: Summon Bear Step 2: You and your bear beat the bejesus out of a dude.

[johnbragg]

Sorry to be That Guy, but what does your lack of knowledge about SPOILER tags have to do with your unwillingness to use proper line breaks? They seem entirely unrelated to me.... :smallconfused::smalltongue:

By the way, to use the SPOILER tag, just put SPOILER and /SPOILER in the square brackets.

Words words words

Reply to this message, and you'll see how to do it.

[Gizmogidget]

Eh, sometimes I forget to keep track of runaway sentences and paragraphs. But in response to johnbragg, I completely get the concept. Personally the advice applies to all my players, as all my players are all ages 10-12. Staying focused is there biggest problem I say, hard too read a 300 page manual, if you get easily distracted.

[SPOILER/SPOILER]
Just testing, thanks johnbragg.

[IZ42]

Eh, sometimes I forget to keep track of runaway sentences and paragraphs. But in response to johnbragg, I completely get the concept. Personally the advice applies to all my players, as all my players are all ages 10-12. Staying focused is there biggest problem I say, hard too read a 300 page manual, if you get easily distracted.

[SPOILER/SPOILER]
Just testing, thanks johnbragg.

Ah, you misunderstood. He means this:

[spoiler] stuff [./spoiler] (obviously without that period, but you get the idea)

[johnbragg]

Eh, sometimes I forget to keep track of runaway sentences and paragraphs. But in response to johnbragg, I completely get the concept. Personally the advice applies to all my players, as all my players are all ages 10-12. Staying focused is there biggest problem I say, hard too read a 300 page manual, if you get easily distracted.


Just testing, thanks johnbragg.

{spoiler=Label}words words words{/spoiler}
Except with [ ] instead of { }

For 10-12 yos who aren't diving into the books, I'd definitely run things for them that boil down to 3-4 combat options, melee strike, ranged attack, cast-my-spell.

For RP, throw the druid a wounded bird to talk to every once in a while.

(Screw resource management and prepared spells, screw the rules, you're a druid, you can talk to birds. Now heal the bird and ask it what happened, so the party can find out there's a Heffalump or whatever in the woods.)

[Lost in Hyrule]

My worst player, C, likes to play a bit on the chaotic side. Still a friend, not much drama, but he still has a habit of making us groan at his silliness.

In our first tale, we find our heroes in an ancient catacombs system. This was the second adventure I had ever run, and all seemed to be enjoying it.

The party came into a grand chamber where a mighty statue of an ancient king sat. An ethereal force inhabited the statue, and the king came to life, powered by his ghost. He told the party of their mission to come to him at his tower. As the statue returned to stillness, the party turned to go. C, however, with his Minotaur character, noticed the great jewels in the statue's crown.

The party tried to persuade him to leave, but he began to climb the statue. They told him it was a bad idea, but he climbed still further. They all left the chamber as he began to pry out the first gem. The King came back to life and grabbed C. He crushed him lightly, scolded his foolish greed, then chucked him out of the chamber, the door sealing behind him. (I even drew a small red streak on the map for where C skipped off the stone!)

The cleric got him up and running again. The moral of the story: don't mess with the quest giver if he's 30 feet tall, made of stone and regretful spirits, and you're level 3.

Braveblade was C's Halfling Ranger in our most recent game of 5e, running through HotDQ. Beware minor spoilers!

His backstory said he used to be a Dragonborn before a curse turned him into a Halfling. He had a Pterodactyl as a Companion, and a propensity for sneaking off on side missions when the rest of us were content to sleep.

We met some unsavory folks in an inn, and they refused to let us even sleep in the stable with their horses. He killed on of their horses, which did not endear them to us!

At an inn a month further on, he decided the best way to deal with a cultists warehouse was to burn it down. Luckily, he was stopped before enacting his plan.

At the end of our campaign, we had been traveling all day through a marsh until we came to a dark castle. I began establishing camp in the outer courtyard, as we needed the rest. C and several others explored the keep up ahead. C alone went down a dark staircase into the bowels of the dungeon. He found a hall too wide to see across, filled with all manner of treasure.

As he slunk along, he chucked a sapphire into the room. A thunk sounds through the chamber as a black dragon rises to leer at him. Braveblade says "Hello. How are you?" 2 rounds later, he is nothing more than a sizzling lump on the floor.

We later slay the dragon, and over the years restore the castle as the lair effect of the beast subsides. We name our keep Castle Braveblade in honor of our comrade. Later, I speak to my friend, the Sorceror. Analyzing his behavior and what he told us of his backstory, I conditions to a sad realization:

"We named our castle after an idiot, didnt we?"

No hard feelings, but I wish he made better choices!

[Malak'ai]

Hey People,

Just an update on the G saga.
I had a meeting with most of the other players about how G has been acting and they all basically agree with Marlowe and I to a lesser extent as the other two who were at the meeting were both new players, but they had started to notice the behavour.

So I'm going to be having a talk with G about our concerns, and make it clear to him that his antics are detracting from the game and lessening our enjoyment, but also make it extremely clear to him that we don't want him to leave the game (because that would ruin it for me) but that he has to make changes, unfortunately I wont be able to do it before our next session which should be starting in about 30 minutes from the time of this post, but it will certainly be before the session after that (maybe Monday).

So please, wish me luck and let's hope I get through that talk without giving or recieving a black eye :smallbiggrin:.

[Inevitability]

Wait, so you're Railroading him by preventing him from playing a Vampire? :smallsigh: When he shows up with a plan to get the NPC to Vamp him, have it break his neck instead, and toss his body to the ghouls.

Possible. This, however, would allow S to make yet another character, which will most likely have the exact skills necessary for this part of the adventure (maybe necromancer wizard or Life cleric), and I really don't want that.

[Ralanr]

I have a friend who I shall name T. T is a nice guy and a fun person to debate with. But lately I've been hating the characters he plays. T has every right to play the characters he does, but when he calls me out on playing the same kind of character all the time, then it just gets hypocritical.

T has played many characters, what bothers me when T makes a character is either A) His character is always in a relationship with his girlfriend (Fair, but it keeps happening. Every time.) and/or B) Whenever T makes a female character, she is the most annoying and dare I say pathetic excuse for a person I see in the group. I'd honestly be fine with this if T let his characters develop into better people. But they don't. If a character is miserable (Which his female characters ALWAYS are) then the character stays miserable no matter how the story goes down.

An example: T is now playing a paladin who is a hermaphrodite (Also should point out that T apparently loves making his characters odd this way. Normally it's fine, but when T brings out the Vampire character (Who can become a total hindrance to the party by the fact that she needs to drink blood and has poor control of it when she sees it. And has to make sure that no one else notices. CAUSE IT'S BAD. (I'm probably overreacting, but the special snowflakes are annoying when you push their specialness in what they are, not in how they play) Then we had the slime alchemist, who just uses bubbles to hold his/it's potions and hides in cracks and bags. Not broken at all). Apparently T's character is ashamed of this blessing of her god, so she hides it because she's afraid other people will see her as a monster. Suddenly when T's girlfriend see's her genitalia, she runs away before bothering to deal with it. When they've caught up they haven't talked about it, and T describes his character as thinking "She doesn't deserve her."

This paladin also multiclassed into wizard and took a demon familiar (It's a neutral demon of course...yes.) though T tells me that T doesn't trust my character during the moment where a Bone Devil was under my control (Iron Flask item, long story, lost the demon, didn't care) because it was a demon/devil. I cannot call the hypocrisy on this in character because his character never directly said it. T's character also is intimidated by mine, despite the fact that he has done nothing to harm them.

When T's paladin's familiar went missing, all T had his character do was lock herself in a room and pray. That's it. Didn't try and find the familiar (Who apparently is her closest friend), didn't ask us to help find the familiar, just prayed to her god. I'm not against praying, but I feel as though it's better AFTER ALL OTHER OPTIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED (Sorry for Caps. I've been wanting to get this off my chest.)

T's paladin is also apparently her happiest when she is cooking. That's fine on it's own, but when added to the depression, the dependency (Apparently T's character will do anything for his girlfriend's character if it meant staying with her. Seriously it's really messed up. His girlfriend's character is relatively sane (She's obsessed with books) thankfully so it doesn't become an abusive relationship.) and the martyrism (will explain) it doesn't look nice. I'm thinking a really negative stereotype.

On the martyrism, apparently one of her traits is along the lines of "Putting everyone before her". Sounds noble right? No. Not with this character. This character is dependent on others and is willing to sacrifice herself to save others who she is desperate for their love and approval. And when they try to reach out (As my character has done a few times) she pushes them away. She's trying to be the great martyr, but no one aside from T's girlfriend knows enough about her to freaking care if she dies. I'm half a mind to let T's character die in combat next time if it wasn't for T's whining and moaning when something T doesn't like happens.

So I'm playing with a depressed and dependent paladin hermaprhodite with a martyr/self sacrifice syndrome but no desire to learn about those around her. If I play the big guy too much then fine, at least people have fun with what I do. But T's depressive characters? Several people complain about it, sadly not to T's face because we don't want to discourage him.

It's not as though T can't make fun characters, he does. They're all male though, all of his male characters are happy go lucky or not depressed. It's really annoying actually, because I get this kneejerk reaction to ask him to play a male because if T makes a female it's going to be draining to deal with.

I'm probably being a jerk and there is probably a whole other side to this. But this character rant was giving me sleep trouble after my character session. So I needed it out.

[johnbragg]

Hey People,

Just an update on the G saga.
I had a meeting with most of the other players about how G has been acting and they all basically agree with Marlowe and I to a lesser extent as the other two who were at the meeting were both new players, but they had started to notice the behavour.

So I'm going to be having a talk with G about our concerns, and make it clear to him that his antics are detracting from the game and lessening our enjoyment, but also make it extremely clear to him that we don't want him to leave the game (because that would ruin it for me) but that he has to make changes, unfortunately I wont be able to do it before our next session which should be starting in about 30 minutes from the time of this post, but it will certainly be before the session after that (maybe Monday).

So please, wish me luck and let's hope I get through that talk without giving or recieving a black eye :smallbiggrin:.

How would G leave the game ruin it for you? G is a terrible role-player, bad at mechanics, and a volatile and violent person.

What's the upside to gaming with G? Are you in a relationship with him, is he a sibling?

Because G is the kind of RPG player who people who despise RPGers are talking about.

Re-read your last line. You're going into a conversation knowing that there's a significant (5%? 10%?) chance that G hauls off and gets physically violent.

I"m still curious as to how G's character explains destroying the bracelet, and at the same time explains "Durr, I forgot that we have five party members not four, durr"

[Kish]

Hey People,

Just an update on the G saga.
I had a meeting with most of the other players about how G has been acting and they all basically agree with Marlowe and I to a lesser extent as the other two who were at the meeting were both new players, but they had started to notice the behavour.

So I'm going to be having a talk with G about our concerns, and make it clear to him that his antics are detracting from the game and lessening our enjoyment, but also make it extremely clear to him that we don't want him to leave the game (because that would ruin it for me) but that he has to make changes, unfortunately I wont be able to do it before our next session which should be starting in about 30 minutes from the time of this post, but it will certainly be before the session after that (maybe Monday).

So please, wish me luck and let's hope I get through that talk without giving or recieving a black eye :smallbiggrin:.
A horrible person who's also a horrible player leaving the game would ruin it for you?

Why?

I have a friend who I shall name T. T is a nice guy and a fun person to debate with. But lately I've been hating the characters he plays. T has every right to play the characters he does, but when he calls me out on playing the same kind of character all the time, then it just gets hypocritical.

T has played many characters, what bothers me when T makes a character is either A) His character is always in a relationship with his girlfriend (Fair, but it keeps happening. Every time.) and/or B) Whenever T makes a female character, she is the most annoying and dare I say pathetic excuse for a person I see in the group. I'd honestly be fine with this if T let his characters develop into better people. But they don't. If a character is miserable (Which his female characters ALWAYS are) then the character stays miserable no matter how the story goes down.

An example: T is now playing a paladin who is a hermaphrodite (Also should point out that T apparently loves making his characters odd this way. Normally it's fine, but when T brings out the Vampire character (Who can become a total hindrance to the party by the fact that she needs to drink blood and has poor control of it when she sees it. And has to make sure that no one else notices. CAUSE IT'S BAD. (I'm probably overreacting, but the special snowflakes are annoying when you push their specialness in what they are, not in how they play) Then we had the slime alchemist, who just uses bubbles to hold his/it's potions and hides in cracks and bags. Not broken at all). Apparently T's character is ashamed of this blessing of her god, so she hides it because she's afraid other people will see her as a monster. Suddenly when T's girlfriend see's her genitalia, she runs away before bothering to deal with it. When they've caught up they haven't talked about it, and T describes his character as thinking "She doesn't deserve her."

This paladin also multiclassed into wizard and took a demon familiar (It's a neutral demon of course...yes.) though T tells me that T doesn't trust my character during the moment where a Bone Devil was under my control (Iron Flask item, long story, lost the demon, didn't care) because it was a demon/devil. I cannot call the hypocrisy on this in character because his character never directly said it. T's character also is intimidated by mine, despite the fact that he has done nothing to harm them.

When T's paladin's familiar went missing, all T had his character do was lock herself in a room and pray. That's it. Didn't try and find the familiar (Who apparently is her closest friend), didn't ask us to help find the familiar, just prayed to her god. I'm not against praying, but I feel as though it's better AFTER ALL OTHER OPTIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED (Sorry for Caps. I've been wanting to get this off my chest.)

T's paladin is also apparently her happiest when she is cooking. That's fine on it's own, but when added to the depression, the dependency (Apparently T's character will do anything for his girlfriend's character if it meant staying with her. Seriously it's really messed up. His girlfriend's character is relatively sane (She's obsessed with books) thankfully so it doesn't become an abusive relationship.) and the martyrism (will explain) it doesn't look nice. I'm thinking a really negative stereotype.

On the martyrism, apparently one of her traits is along the lines of "Putting everyone before her". Sounds noble right? No. Not with this character. This character is dependent on others and is willing to sacrifice herself to save others who she is desperate for their love and approval. And when they try to reach out (As my character has done a few times) she pushes them away. She's trying to be the great martyr, but no one aside from T's girlfriend knows enough about her to freaking care if she dies. I'm half a mind to let T's character die in combat next time if it wasn't for T's whining and moaning when something T doesn't like happens.

So I'm playing with a depressed and dependent paladin hermaprhodite with a martyr/self sacrifice syndrome but no desire to learn about those around her. If I play the big guy too much then fine, at least people have fun with what I do. But T's depressive characters? Several people complain about it, sadly not to T's face because we don't want to discourage him.

It's not as though T can't make fun characters, he does. They're all male though, all of his male characters are happy go lucky or not depressed. It's really annoying actually, because I get this kneejerk reaction to ask him to play a male because if T makes a female it's going to be draining to deal with.

I'm probably being a jerk and there is probably a whole other side to this. But this character rant was giving me sleep trouble after my character session. So I needed it out.
It sounds like T is really sexist. I hope there's another explanation for his treatment of female characters.

[Ralanr]

It sounds like T is really sexist. I hope there's another explanation for his treatment of female characters.

There probably is, but niether me or the DM has seen or heard it. T will give reasonable backstories (Or just go with "Her backstory helps make sense of it" and not explain it. Or he does to the DM). The DM is the one who pointed out to me that it is pretty sexist, which is an argument I'm trying to avoid if I ever bring it up to him.

[Cluedrew]

OK, because of the conversation just up the page let's see if I can make some labeled spoiler blocks. I've got three players to talk about.

Of all the problem players I have run into about half of them are the chaotic stupid type. Doing things without reason or thought, I'm sure everyone has seen a few, but there is one that stands out. CS did many of these things, but a few of these things stand out.

First, CS's character was known as Meow. The reason is simple, when we asked for the character name, we got Meow back. CS tried to get us to use the actual name later, but Meow was used for the rest of the campaign.

The other highlight came right after a defeated mini-boss fight the boss turned into a little girl.
CS: "I take my pants off and put them on the girl."
GM: "... nothing happens..."
Me: "Wait, you can't do that, I still have your pants."
CS: "What?"
Me: "I've had them ever since the battle at the wall [two meetings ago]... you can have them back."

I would tell the story about how my character ended up with Meow's pants (and almost ended up with Thane's) but the logic involved is about the same as you see here.

Vincent is the character. Vincent's player was usually a good player and role-player, but he really fell down here. You see the role-play started with characters getting into a tournament. The entrance tests were different for each station, and hence character, and were written by the player as part of their character's introduction.

Vincent had a intellectual trial, where he had to identify a chemical in a vial. He was the first person to solve it. Some other people had actually died trying to figure it out because they drank it. But Vincent figures it out by holding it up to the light. Of course it does mention he had done work with it in his laboratory about a month ago, so OK he got lucky and was familiar with it.

Then he decides to reduce the number of competitors and dumps half the vial over his shoulder, killing everyone else in the room and maybe in some of the adjoining rooms. So Vincent leaves and sings an happy song as he goes and the screams of the dying echo down the streets. Good character building moment, except why is no one reacting to the screams of the dying?

Then Vincent arrives at the athlete's village for the tournament and buys more mysterious chemicals. Instead of paying he murders the shop keeper, classic. ... Except that the murder took place in the athlete's village of the government run tournament, where government means world controlling empire with magic. Vincent had until someone else walked into that store plus maybe an hour before he was arrested.

In truth this doesn't qualify as a worst player story because everything else Vincent's player did was pretty cool, the problem aside Vincent was a cool character and we were in the process of solving the problem when the campaign died for unrelated reasons. But the incident made such an impact on me that I still use "The Problem with Vincent" as a short hand when ever a character acts in complete disregard to the natural consequences of their actions and if the same person is control of the reaction then the natural consequences do not occur.

R was not terrible, or he wouldn't be if he just had some redeeming feature. R (which is just a random letter to identify him) was actually pretty well rounded in this regard. I've got a smattering of stories to give you, not all from the same game.

R's character, and R's character's butler, were minmaxed to the extreme. Any skill that grabbed his attention would get all the points he could put into it. And he would go on and on about these skills and how awesome they were and all the things he could do with them. Sorry, that should be "the thing he could do with them", this guy would get really narrow. I must of sat through the dive bomb combo at least half a dozen times, the combo had three parts (strength + toughness + flight).

Luckily, I don't think that there are any cases that where he did anything negative to anyone else in the party. The moment you and he were where not in the same party though... one time the party was split and the "active" part of the party was in a social encounter with some guards, so the GM decided to have the "inactive" part of the party role play the guards.

The guard R played was the most paranoid and confrontational individual I have ever met (real life or any fictional), who of course just happened to ask the questions we did not have answers for. We only got through that because the other guards accepted the excuses, ignored their fellow and apologized on his behalf.

So at one point the party when world hopping from a near-real world to a land of magic users in grand cities. At one point the local guard asks for some identification, R gives the wizard a drivers licence. Let me point something out, there were no cars in this world, they had no idea what in the world a driver's licence was.

So R explains it, world hopping and all. Because the world hopping mechanic actually came from this world (not that we should have access to it) he is labeled as a liar instead of a madman, and the guard (who it should be pointed out it a magic user of no small power) asks us for some proper ID. R yells for the guard to go away, which doesn't help. But eventually one of the other characters manages so salvage the situation with a story and cleaver power use so the party is only deported rather than executed.

To cap it all off, there was tell that R's complaint about the session was the lack of role-playing opportunities and he went on for a day or two about how they should of accepted the driver's licence.

Once the party came across a necromancer and did battle. The necromancer summoned some burning undead that set you on fire with some melee attacks. Now R's character, being the big strong hero that he was, charges forward (minor note, this is the same reason he spent the entirety of the last battle in a hole) and somehow ends up being grabbled and pinned to the ground. So the burring effect kicks in. "But I'm wearing plate armour, I can't be on fire."

So game balance reasons aside R wants immunity to fire damage, or at least the burning status condition. The GM handled this pretty well and flavoured the burning condition as the ashy flesh of the undead flaking off and burning while sticking to R's character. Which doesn't actually address the non-existent issue, but it was a cool and R shut up anyways.

Now we were all friends, or at least stuck together so we might as well become friends, so I talked to R about some of the problem. Mostly his thin and inconsistent character personalities (looking back, I'm not sure how he pulled off both) but he refused to accept that there was a problem. I can't even remember how he pulled the transitions off but every time I brought something up I would get a rant about some awesome character power without even an acknowledgment of the intended subject. The exception being the driver's licence issue where he just continued to rant about how the guard should of accepted that.

It just occurred to me that he never (that I heard) ever blamed the GM for it, just the in character portray of the guard. There may be some significant reason behind that but I have no idea what it is.

A lot of R's problems came from the misconception that "awesome=power", but here are some particular examples.

There was the "an awesome character must be powerful" direction, where he focused only on what his character was strong at, I did mention minmaxing. To his credit he never put anyone else down to achieve this, but he never turned to them for help and expected them to be needing his help. Oh, and that thing, where you play D&D 4e, pick a defender and then (wait for it) choose powers only by the damage they deal, he did that too. So yeah, "awesome=power=hurting others" must have been his thought.

Then there was the "a powerful character must be awesome" direction, where he ignored giving his character any real personality because stats. There where multiple problems with this including an over reliance on mind control. But my favourite was when R said what he was going to say when we got to the thrown room of some lady emperor. To paraphrase "My leadership is maxed out at 'world leader', put me in charge of your army." I paraphrase because to take out the address to the emperor, which probably would get filtered if I repeated it.

I done know else how to describe this one. Back when world hopping was introduced R wanted to go to (as in was trying to figure out how to do it in game) an alternate reality where he had conquered the world so he could "assassinate myself and rule the world".

I would put that in Dark Orchid but I don't know the colour code. Off the top of my head I can think of at least one narrative, game-play, logical and ethical problem (each) with this.

Now this is hardly a capstone moment, but I would like to share the story of the time R's character was heavily damaged, would pass out with one more hit or die if that hit was more than a tap. He also had a specially bred wolf's jaws around his neck. Again someone else got him out of the mess. R was kind of angry that he didn't have the opportunity to fight his way out, despite the fact by the rules his chance of surviving was exactly 0.

The other player never heard anything of it though, being R's girlfriend the GM ran a side game for so she would understand what a role-playing game was. And I think she did better than R. I have one other thing to say in her favour, which is that R choose to spend time with her over attending our games.

So ends the story of R.

[Solaris]

There probably is, but niether me or the DM has seen or heard it. T will give reasonable backstories (Or just go with "Her backstory helps make sense of it" and not explain it. Or he does to the DM). The DM is the one who pointed out to me that it is pretty sexist, which is an argument I'm trying to avoid if I ever bring it up to him.

I don't know that sexism is necessarily the motive (I find that it's best to avoid seeking offense in everything, and it could be he just likes playing that sort of character without thinking that women in general are like that), but the "I have a reasonable backstory" no more works for an excuse than is "It's what my character would do".
In both instances, they're what the player chose.

[Ralanr]

I don't know that sexism is necessarily the motive (I find that it's best to avoid seeking offense in everything, and it could be he just likes playing that sort of character without thinking that women in general are like that), but the "I have a reasonable backstory" no more works for an excuse than is "It's what my character would do".
In both instances, they're what the player chose.

It turns out T does like playing characters like that. Sitting down and talking with a fellow player can settle almost any problem. At the very least I'm less bothered by it.

Honestly venting here only made me think about it more. And I feel kinda silly for it since it was behind T's back (He's not on this site, but still).

The wonders of communication!

[I3igAl]

and attempt to buy his freedom by claiming the rest of the party were in on the "plot" and offering to turn king's evidence against them.

That's actually quite clever.

[Malak'ai]

How would G leave the game ruin it for you? G is a terrible role-player, bad at mechanics, and a volatile and violent person.

What's the upside to gaming with G? Are you in a relationship with him, is he a sibling?

Because G is the kind of RPG player who people who despise RPGers are talking about.

Re-read your last line. You're going into a conversation knowing that there's a significant (5%? 10%?) chance that G hauls off and gets physically violent.

I"m still curious as to how G's character explains destroying the bracelet, and at the same time explains "Durr, I forgot that we have five party members not four, durr"


A horrible person who's also a horrible player leaving the game would ruin it for you?

Why?

Now don't get me wrong, G is a horrible, self-centered player who has no idea of mechanincs and what not, but outside of the game he isn't a bad guy.
Yes his views on certain subjects are questionable, but at heart he isn't a bad person. He's gone out of his way to help many of our group of friends when we've asked for it, so please hold off on judging his actual person from a few comments in a RPG forum.

As for my comment about him becoming violent, while yes there was a very slim chance of happening (if you want to put a percentage on it I'd say 0.5%), it was purely a tounge in cheek comment.

And yes, it would ruin the game for me as even though him and I have personal problems between us, he is still a friend, and he's also friends with others in the group. I don't like having to kick people from games. I would like to believe that no matter what problems we have in game we can work them out so that we can all participate and enjoy the game.

The way he brought up the braclet situation did come as a bit of a shock. He deliberately told the other players while the newest player was running late. And he used the whole "Well it's what my character would do" excuse when they asked him why he did it. Infact what he said was (and I'm parapharsing here) "You can do what you want, but it's what my character would have done. You guys didn't want to sell it then as it was, so I came up with a way where we'd get some gold for it. I don't care if you dont think it was a good idea."

[CelestialSloth]

Ooh! Ooh! I have one!
So. I am playing as a paladin, and this guy (I'll call him S) plays a fighter/rouge. S constantly whines that "he is tired of having a paladin in the party". So one session, the party sent me into the front and waited in the door frame while I fought off 4 plague zombies, cuz I am resistant to disease. They were just about to jump into the fught and help me out when S slams the door and tries to lock it.
Fortunately for me I shoved the door open before S could lock it.
We spiked the door shut so the zombies couldn't get in, and then we started running out of the dungeon.

Later I saved S's life by killing two plague zombies that were totally destroying S.

Sometimes I think I should'nt've killed those zombies.

[Sir Chuckles]

Now don't get me wrong, G is a horrible, self-centered player who has no idea of mechanics and what not, but outside of the game he isn't a bad guy.
Yes his views on certain subjects are questionable, but at heart he isn't a bad person. He's gone out of his way to help many of our group of friends when we've asked for it, so please hold off on judging his actual person from a few comments in a RPG forum.
The problem, however, is that this isn't a question of if he's a decent guy or not. It's a question of if he's a good player. And what you've described is...not.
I've had a similar problem with one of my players, and we gladly invite him over, but not when we're playing a tabletop. Mortal Kombat, Skullgirls, and some grilling? Absolutely.
D&D, Paranoia, or Shadowrun? Dear god no.
Even someone is a friend and you believe you owe him for past actions, that does not mean he has to play D&D with you. There are plenty of other things that won't cause headaches.


And yes, it would ruin the game for me as even though him and I have personal problems between us, he is still a friend, and he's also friends with others in the group. I don't like having to kick people from games. I would like to believe that no matter what problems we have in game we can work them out so that we can all participate and enjoy the game.
If he's unwilling to work them out, which it is apparent that he is either unwilling or doesn't believe himself to be a problem, than it's not worth it. Doubly so if it's detrimental to have him in the game.


The way he brought up the bracelet situation did come as a bit of a shock. He deliberately told the other players while the newest player was running late. And he used the whole "Well it's what my character would do" excuse when they asked him why he did it. In fact what he said was (and I'm paraphrasing here) "You can do what you want, but it's what my character would have done. You guys didn't want to sell it then as it was, so I came up with a way where we'd get some gold for it. I don't care if you don't think it was a good idea."
These are pretty hefty and classic horrid player actions. "It's what my character would do" is such an ear bug at tabletops that I've seen people who use it, even for very minor actions, get booted almost on the spot. It's the tabletop version of a schoolchild going "But he started it". It is a classic shield used to defend their own bad actions, regardless of the character being played. I commend you and the other players for sticking it out and not abandoning him in game, if you didn't, as it is clear that he has no interest in actually being a part of a group.

But the real clincher here is the direct statement that he did not care what other players thought of the idea. Even if he was willing to split the gold, the underlying problem is that he did not even consider the the other players when making a decision. In a group/party based game. That's usually about implied cooperation. :smallannoyed:

[Malak'ai]

The problem, however, is that this isn't a question of if he's a decent guy or not. It's a question of if he's a good player. And what you've described is...not.
I've had a similar problem with one of my players, and we gladly invite him over, but not when we're playing a tabletop. Mortal Kombat, Skullgirls, and some grilling? Absolutely.
D&D, Paranoia, or Shadowrun? Dear god no.
Even someone is a friend and you believe you owe him for past actions, that does not mean he has to play D&D with you. There are plenty of other things that won't cause headaches.


If he's unwilling to work them out, which it is apparent that he is either unwilling or doesn't believe himself to be a problem, than it's not worth it. Doubly so if it's detrimental to have him in the game.


These are pretty hefty and classic horrid player actions. "It's what my character would do" is such an ear bug at tabletops that I've seen people who use it, even for very minor actions, get booted almost on the spot. It's the tabletop version of a schoolchild going "But he started it". It is a classic shield used to defend their own bad actions, regardless of the character being played. I commend you and the other players for sticking it out and not abandoning him in game, if you didn't, as it is clear that he has no interest in actually being a part of a group.

But the real clincher here is the direct statement that he did not care what other players thought of the idea. Even if he was willing to split the gold, the underlying problem is that he did not even consider the the other players when making a decision. In a group/party based game. That's usually about implied cooperation. :smallannoyed:

Oh I agree totally that he is an absolutely terrible player, and that his actions in-game are making it hard for us all to keep from going full PvP on his butt.

I was answering others comments about him being a "horrible person", making comments about his actual person, not his characters.

As to his character's actions, I haven't had a chance to sit down with him and discuss how these are affecting the other players and the possible ways of working through them, so at the moment, though some small comments have been made by the other players, he doesn't realise the full depth of these actions on other peoples enjoyment yet.

[Solaris]

So at one point the party when world hopping from a near-real world to a land of magic users in grand cities. At one point the local guard asks for some identification, R gives the wizard a drivers licence. Let me point something out, there were no cars in this world, they had no idea what in the world a driver's licence was.

So R explains it, world hopping and all. Because the world hopping mechanic actually came from this world (not that we should have access to it) he is labeled as a liar instead of a madman, and the guard (who it should be pointed out it a magic user of no small power) asks us for some proper ID. R yells for the guard to go away, which doesn't help. But eventually one of the other characters manages so salvage the situation with a story and cleaver power use so the party is only deported rather than executed.

To cap it all off, there was tell that R's complaint about the session was the lack of role-playing opportunities and he went on for a day or two about how they should of accepted the driver's licence.

So... he's a bad player because he attempted to explain to a local guard that the party had been subjected to a world-hopping effect which is known to happen in the setting? This guard, being a magic-user and thus probably fairly intelligent, could reasonably have at least pointed them in the direction of getting right with the law (and even provisionally accepted the license on account of it being from a legitimate authority) when it became apparent that they were world-hoppers.
And somehow the party got threatened with execution because he raised his voice at the guard? They had to negotiate and finaggle it down to deportation? How was either one even on the table as a repercussion for yelling at a guard?

Unless there's something absent from this story, R didn't screw up nearly so badly as the DM.

[Flashy]

So... he's a bad player because he attempted to explain to a local guard that the party had been subjected to a world-hopping effect which is known to happen in the setting? This guard, being a magic-user and thus probably fairly intelligent, could reasonably have at least pointed them in the direction of getting right with the law (and even provisionally accepted the license on account of it being from a legitimate authority) when it became apparent that they were world-hoppers.
And somehow the party got threatened with execution because he raised his voice at the guard? They had to negotiate and finaggle it down to deportation? How was either one even on the table as a repercussion for yelling at a guard?

Unless there's something absent from this story, R didn't screw up nearly so badly as the DM.

I actually think the one about trying to assassinate himself to rule the world was potentially legitimate too. It'd probably wind up taking at least as much effort as just going out to conquer the world yourself but as long as world hopping has been introduced as a concept that actually sounds like a pretty fun adventure premise. It depends a lot on how sandbox-y the campaign was though.

[Anonymouswizard]

These are pretty hefty and classic horrid player actions. "It's what my character would do" is such an ear bug at tabletops that I've seen people who use it, even for very minor actions, get booted almost on the spot.

I've legitimately just that reason about four or five times in the past year or so, once having it supplied for me, but the thing is these all either had minimal consequences (bugging a party member while I was under a curse, I was rendered unable to obtain any information), were beneficial to the party (sneaking off to gather resources that would be hard for most to find), or only harmed me (several actions that racked up sins), and as proved last session, any action that would harm the party will get argued about until the player backs down (who tries to detain 8 enemies, including at least two with guns, when they outnumber your active combatants almost three to one? (in a system where two hits means a decent chance of being out of the combat)). We were actually arguing very passionately that it's not what his character would do, his character is probably smart enough to back down.

The fact that he seems to roll multiple critical successes in a session and has never critically failed, means that his trigger happy ninja is closer to redemption than my character who has been working at it for 5 years (compared to his month), and just makes logical but bad decisions (taking a bribe from a greed demon to give to the church).

[Cluedrew]

To Solaris:
Both actually, this was one of the Game Master's worst scenes, he talked about it with me after (I was the "bouncer" the one he bounced ideas off of) and he had a lot of regrets about that scene. He felt that he didn't provide the outs he should of, the ones he did provide were not made clear and so on.

Also, about this particular scene, I wasn't actually there for this one. However I got the story from both the GM and R afterwards, so I believe my understanding of the events is accurate.

We had to be very quiet while traveling through the hub world, because we were dark power users with a "kill on sight" order in the hub world (again maybe a bad choice on the Game Master's part, but that is for the other thread). So that is where the execution thing came from.

So after causing some other minor trouble where we almost got found out the local guard wants to talk to us about the report they got about the incident. They come to the party's house and the guard captain asks us for identification, in particular some mage seals showing that we are prober magic users. Which would explain the "false report" and since we are living in the upper city that is entirely inhabited by magic users it is almost a necessity anyways. But we don't have any so R starts yelling at the guard to leave us alone.

After a few more comments back-and-forth R provides the driver's licences, the guard is confused so R explains the world hopping thing. The guard doesn't believe the world hopping story because what allows it is so rare, it has explicitly been "millennia" since the last time it was possible, and asks for real (or "from this world") identification or could we each just cast some spells to show we are proper magic users.

R refuses to do either. And yes he did say he did in his version of events as well. Between the fact that they came to our house and he had provided legitimate ID he felt justified in yelling at the "police" to go away. And yes, the ID was legitimate government issued and all that, but the guards had no way of knowing what a driver's licence was and even if they did, they couldn't authenticate it.

Also, I should say that at this point, just apologizing and going with the guards would probably have solved the problem. The last time we had a run in with the guard it was trespassing, braking and entering or something similar and that led to a quick trial and an role-play session were we acted out our community service hours.

Of course things take yet another turn or the worse at this point when CS from above comes home from some other task he was doing and tries to murder the guard captain. Luckily he misses and the party restrains him quickly so things turn into open violence.

After a bit more yelling one of the other party members sighs, leaves the house and casts a "spell". Most of the party follows suit, shadow magic is made to look like a simple illusion spell, fire breath like fire ball and so on. Except for CS, who can't fake anything so we reveal to be a dark power user that we are keeping for study.

So we get deported for keeping company with a dark power user and not keeping a proper hold on him. So that part was not R's fault.


To Flashy:
If he was interested in it for the adventure I would agree with you. He just wanted the quick rise to power. Sort of like Ao-Sue from the Chief Circle saga which is where the Dark Orchid comment came from.

Right after he gave that quote I pointed out that would be hard because the alternate R would have way more resources than R's character, would be stronger than him because he has the experience of conquering the world. Perhaps the latter part was faulty game logic, but still his response was something like "he'll make me his second in command because we are the same person". So he wanted to hand wave the adventure and the work and just rule the world.


I hope that explains both cases, if not... that is most of the details I can think of some maybe I should cut R some slack.

[Flashy]

To Solaris:
To Flashy:
If he was interested in it for the adventure I would agree with you. He just wanted the quick rise to power. Sort of like Ao-Sue from the Chief Circle saga which is where the Dark Orchid comment came from.

Right after he gave that quote I pointed out that would be hard because the alternate R would have way more resources than R's character, would be stronger than him because he has the experience of conquering the world. Perhaps the latter part was faulty game logic, but still his response was something like "he'll make me his second in command because we are the same person". So he wanted to hand wave the adventure and the work and just rule the world.


I hope that explains both cases, if not... that is most of the details I can think of some maybe I should cut R some slack.

Ah, yeah, that makes way more sense. That's super annoying.

[Lvl45DM!]

Recently some of my friends and my missus asked me to run some D&D games for them. I was hesitant since I wasn't sure they'd be really interested and were just kind of wanting something new. I explained that DMing is a bit of work for me and if they wanted to do it, I would, but they had to be SURE.

The lineup is
L, my missus, playing a ranger dual wielding hand xbows on a horse. CG
D, a 'cool' guy. Likes drinking and partying. Playing a CE barbarian with an evil soul sucking sword.
R, my fellow nerd. Never RPGd before but seemed the most interested. Played an LE assassin/illusionist.

Funnily enough, D was and still is awesome. L really got into the RP aspect.

R, on the other hand...

The first few sessions were ok, though R often complained that in combat he had nothing to do after using his 2 combat spells that he learned every day. Even though he had high enough DEX to dual wield or use a bow, or he could backstab if he wanted. This became a consistent complaint. I mean he was mostly fighting AC 7 or 8 orcs so he had a 35 or 40% chance of hitting, better if it was missle or backstab.
Oh and he was a coward. He had 12 HP (compared to 20 for L and 18 for D) so not a total weakling, nothing could drop him in a hit. But as soon as he took 1 HP he fled the fight and hid until the fight was won.

Annoying.

I tried giving him personal plot hooks but he rejected them all, refusing to make friends with anyone he met, including his party. Demanding that the story should be about his assassins guild.

I eventually cave and they go to burn down a rival thug guild. Then he complains that he's fighting assassins cos they can be sneaky too and he can't run and hide effectively anymore.

He whinges that theres no chance for teamwork, so i set up a hill giant that they can all run around and kite and feel like badasses for fighting. Then he complains that I put in too powerful enemies.

Finally they are in the middle of a guild war. They encounter a lvl 15 assassin who is going to become their new quest giver. He's polite if cold, and admittedly annoyingly vague. But hey, quest giver ettiquette right?

R starts mouthing off, how his guy is a way better assassin and could take him. Questgiver smirks and says "Thats cute. Ok sure whatever you say man. I need your help with this so i bow to your superior skill". Obviously sarcastic but not overly, i though. So, playing a cowardly backstabbing misdirection focused character decides to punch him in the nose. Questgiver draws his sword beats him down and says "Ill forgive you for that, since i still require a man of your skills. If you apologize" R mouths off some more. "Seriously, kid, behave or ill slice your throat" "you're a b***h you couldnt slice bread" Which was pretty funny.
So funny in fact that Questgiver laughs puts away his sword and tried to go on. R backstabs him for 10 damage. Questgiver murders him.

OOC I talk to R and ask WTF. He said he hated his character and wanted to die cos he was too weak and D had an OP sword and L had a horse and all he had were boots that let him automatically dodge 1 attack a round. ( I was generous and gave each a custom magic item)
Ok, fine whatever. New character.

The most cliche, lame, wannabe hero ever. LG Fighter/Mage, parents slain by demons, secretly a prince who was prophesized, born on the night of an eclipse with the power to see demons.
I laugh but, hey its his second character. No worries, heres an awesome sword that lets you channel spells through it. Heres a great CON score so you're not weak and don't have to stay at the back.

Oh nevermind you still retreat if you take 5 damage. In a level 5 game now. He has 40 HP but doesnt want to risk it. He tortures captured orcs despite being LG. "You're LE now" "Thats not fair im doing it for the greater good!" His mission was a local issue, taking out a small group of serial killers. Important sure, but not worth torturing someone over. I renege and let him be LN. Until next session where he tortures a victim of the serial killers to get more information, under the justification that "Im not good anymore" WELP now you're evil and you lose your demon hunting powers, but you gain demonic fear powers.

He loots people mid battle. As in hes fighting an orc or random bandit, kills it, and while his allies are fighting takes up to 3 rounds checking and double checking that he got all the loot, which is by this point, chainmail a long sword and 2-8 gp.

So far i think im being as fair as fair can be. This is all in addition to the fact that he argues with me every step of the way. About crap he knows nothing about. He also argues about tactics and other things but thats fine hes figuring out what does and doesnt work. But it occasionally got out of hand.
R "How many Magic Missles do I cast?"
Me "3"
R "No i think its 5"
Me "No its 3."
R "Seriously? it was 5 last time"
Me "No it wasnt"
R "Thats bull**** you just dont want me to kill your monster."
Me "I have been playing this game for 20 years. You have been playing it for 2 months. You are a 5th level mage. YOU. GET. 3!"
R "Fine whatever"

He is ruining the game for the others. I several times, take him aside and ask him how i can make his gaming experience better. He wants instant cheap resurrection, he was more magic items, he wants more strong monsters that cant hit him.

Eventually he tries to loot a defeated enemy, who is still alive and not bound. So the guy stops him non violently. He attempts to kill a defenseless man for potential gain after assuming that he would just stand there and allow his worldly possessions to be taken away. The enemy beats R's character unconscious. I call the game there and R leaves.

2 weeks later he doesnt show up to DnD. I get no information about this he doesnt respond to texts or messages. He sends one facebook message to the rest of us saying "I need to talk about DND" and then apparently didnt mean to send it to me just the other two. So again i don't hear from him for two weeks. L and D report to me that he doesnt want to play anymore but doesnt want to talk to me about it and that he hates DnD and thinks its a stupid game. He tries to get the other 2 to stop playing so we can still all hang out bi weekly doing something else.

On an unDnD related note he tried to get L, my missus, to leave me for him

In short I hate him and his stupid face and he is the WORST player i have ever had

[Keltest]

Recently some of my friends and my missus asked me to run some D&D games for them. I was hesitant since I wasn't sure they'd be really interested and were just kind of wanting something new. I explained that DMing is a bit of work for me and if they wanted to do it, I would, but they had to be SURE.

The lineup is
L, my missus, playing a ranger dual wielding hand xbows on a horse. CG
D, a 'cool' guy. Likes drinking and partying. Playing a CE barbarian with an evil soul sucking sword.
R, my fellow nerd. Never RPGd before but seemed the most interested. Played an LE assassin/illusionist.

Funnily enough, D was and still is awesome. L really got into the RP aspect.

R, on the other hand...

The first few sessions were ok, though R often complained that in combat he had nothing to do after using his 2 combat spells that he learned every day. Even though he had high enough DEX to dual wield or use a bow, or he could backstab if he wanted. This became a consistent complaint. I mean he was mostly fighting AC 7 or 8 orcs so he had a 35 or 40% chance of hitting, better if it was missle or backstab.
Oh and he was a coward. He had 12 HP (compared to 20 for L and 18 for D) so not a total weakling, nothing could drop him in a hit. But as soon as he took 1 HP he fled the fight and hid until the fight was won.

Annoying.

I tried giving him personal plot hooks but he rejected them all, refusing to make friends with anyone he met, including his party. Demanding that the story should be about his assassins guild.

I eventually cave and they go to burn down a rival thug guild. Then he complains that he's fighting assassins cos they can be sneaky too and he can't run and hide effectively anymore.

He whinges that theres no chance for teamwork, so i set up a hill giant that they can all run around and kite and feel like badasses for fighting. Then he complains that I put in too powerful enemies.

Finally they are in the middle of a guild war. They encounter a lvl 15 assassin who is going to become their new quest giver. He's polite if cold, and admittedly annoyingly vague. But hey, quest giver ettiquette right?

R starts mouthing off, how his guy is a way better assassin and could take him. Questgiver smirks and says "Thats cute. Ok sure whatever you say man. I need your help with this so i bow to your superior skill". Obviously sarcastic but not overly, i though. So, playing a cowardly backstabbing misdirection focused character decides to punch him in the nose. Questgiver draws his sword beats him down and says "Ill forgive you for that, since i still require a man of your skills. If you apologize" R mouths off some more. "Seriously, kid, behave or ill slice your throat" "you're a b***h you couldnt slice bread" Which was pretty funny.
So funny in fact that Questgiver laughs puts away his sword and tried to go on. R backstabs him for 10 damage. Questgiver murders him.

OOC I talk to R and ask WTF. He said he hated his character and wanted to die cos he was too weak and D had an OP sword and L had a horse and all he had were boots that let him automatically dodge 1 attack a round. ( I was generous and gave each a custom magic item)
Ok, fine whatever. New character.

The most cliche, lame, wannabe hero ever. LG Fighter/Mage, parents slain by demons, secretly a prince who was prophesized, born on the night of an eclipse with the power to see demons.
I laugh but, hey its his second character. No worries, heres an awesome sword that lets you channel spells through it. Heres a great CON score so you're not weak and don't have to stay at the back.

Oh nevermind you still retreat if you take 5 damage. In a level 5 game now. He has 40 HP but doesnt want to risk it. He tortures captured orcs despite being LG. "You're LE now" "Thats not fair im doing it for the greater good!" His mission was a local issue, taking out a small group of serial killers. Important sure, but not worth torturing someone over. I renege and let him be LN. Until next session where he tortures a victim of the serial killers to get more information, under the justification that "Im not good anymore" WELP now you're evil and you lose your demon hunting powers, but you gain demonic fear powers.

He loots people mid battle. As in hes fighting an orc or random bandit, kills it, and while his allies are fighting takes up to 3 rounds checking and double checking that he got all the loot, which is by this point, chainmail a long sword and 2-8 gp.

So far i think im being as fair as fair can be. This is all in addition to the fact that he argues with me every step of the way. About crap he knows nothing about. He also argues about tactics and other things but thats fine hes figuring out what does and doesnt work. But it occasionally got out of hand.
R "How many Magic Missles do I cast?"
Me "3"
R "No i think its 5"
Me "No its 3."
R "Seriously? it was 5 last time"
Me "No it wasnt"
R "Thats bull**** you just dont want me to kill your monster."
Me "I have been playing this game for 20 years. You have been playing it for 2 months. You are a 5th level mage. YOU. GET. 3!"
R "Fine whatever"

He is ruining the game for the others. I several times, take him aside and ask him how i can make his gaming experience better. He wants instant cheap resurrection, he was more magic items, he wants more strong monsters that cant hit him.

Eventually he tries to loot a defeated enemy, who is still alive and not bound. So the guy stops him non violently. He attempts to kill a defenseless man for potential gain after assuming that he would just stand there and allow his worldly possessions to be taken away. The enemy beats R's character unconscious. I call the game there and R leaves.

2 weeks later he doesnt show up to DnD. I get no information about this he doesnt respond to texts or messages. He sends one facebook message to the rest of us saying "I need to talk about DND" and then apparently didnt mean to send it to me just the other two. So again i don't hear from him for two weeks. L and D report to me that he doesnt want to play anymore but doesnt want to talk to me about it and that he hates DnD and thinks its a stupid game. He tries to get the other 2 to stop playing so we can still all hang out bi weekly doing something else.

On an unDnD related note he tried to get L, my missus, to leave me for him

In short I hate him and his stupid face and he is the WORST player i have ever had

He... Does know that you were ASKED to run the campaign for them, right?

[Lvl45DM!]

He... Does know that you were ASKED to run the campaign for them, right?

Asked...By him. And the others. They all asked me to. And i said no cos i was afraid of things similar to this happening. And they asked again. And so I did it.

So yes he knows.

Hence his stupid face being hated :smallbiggrin:

[Feddlefew]

Did he try to steal your SO during the game, or...? Because I smell a big, fat ulterior motive. :smalleek:

[Lvl45DM!]

Did he try to steal your SO during the game, or...? Because I smell a big, fat ulterior motive. :smalleek:

No that was last year, before DnD. The whole DnD kerfuffle happened last month by the way. He still has refused to see or speak to me, according to others, because he wishes to avoid conflict and he doesnt want me trying to get him to play again.

[Keltest]

No that was before DnD. This happened last month by the way. He still has refused to see or speak to me, according to others, because he wishes to avoid conflict and he doesnt want me trying to get him to play again.

Eh. In that case, forget about him. He is apparently so passive aggressive about it that someone would end up getting hurt even if he did eventually come clean with you.

[Lvl45DM!]

Eh. In that case, forget about him. He is apparently so passive aggressive about it that someone would end up getting hurt even if he did eventually come clean with you.

Yeah well. The other thing is, aside from one super boring person, ive never had or played with a bad player before. I've played with unskilled players but they always tried really hard and/or were adorable. I've played with the CN loony but honestly he never did anything horrible except try to make his duck into a WarduckTM and willingly bang the succubus. Ive mostly had a great DnD career.

[Zyzzyva]

Yeah well. The other thing is, aside from one super boring person, ive never had or played with a bad player before. I've played with unskilled players but they always tried really hard and/or were adorable. I've played with the CN loony but honestly he never did anything horrible except try to make his duck into a WarduckTM and willingly bang the succubus. Ive mostly had a great DnD career.

Why wouldn't you willingly bang the succubus! I'm proud of you for not metagaming!

But yeah, that definitely sounds like a personality and expectations problem. My favourite part were the boots that let you dodge one attack per round (:smalleek:), which he apparently thought weren't cool enough. Yeah, those are totally underpowered compared to a horse. :smallsigh:

[YossarianLives]

It's amazing how an incredibly fun hobby like roleplaying can be totally ruined by a single bad player.

[Rakoa]

Why wouldn't you willingly bang the succubus! I'm proud of you for not metagaming!

But yeah, that definitely sounds like a personality and expectations problem. My favourite part were the boots that let you dodge one attack per round (:smalleek:), which he apparently thought weren't cool enough. Yeah, those are totally underpowered compared to a horse. :smallsigh:

Hey, I played a dumb-as-rocks Half-Orc Barbarian that willingly banged a Succubus. Rolled a natural 20 for Forititude, too. We got married later! Not even kidding.

[Engine]

Welcome to my worst player.

A bit of context: he was playing a NG Oracle of Life, a wise and charismatic individual touched by his goddess. The rest of the group was played by his OOC friends. My character (an NG Inquisitor of a goddess of freedom) recently paid a Druid to use Awaken on a rabbit (to provide a bit of comic relief and serve as a sidekick). The DM played the awakened rabbit.

IC:
The group was back in town after a tough fight while investigating an infested mansion, to rest and resupply. The Inquisitor and the Oracle had no issue with each other; after a brief chat they decided to go to sleep. During the night the awakened rabbit took a dump on the Oracle's blanket. The morning after the Oracle tried to murder the awakened rabbit, but the Inquisitor saved her at the last moment. After the episode the Oracle was just a pain to deal with, threatening and insulting the Inquisitor without giving any explanation.

OOC:
After the game I was quite confused about the sudden change in behaviour. The explanation on why he played his character like that arrived a couple of days after the game, in a long wall of text that he wrote me on FB. Short story long, he said that the Inquisitor asked the awakened rabbit to take a dump on his character's blanket because I (as a player) was trying to humiliate him - it wasn't true, it was the DM's idea. At the same time he didn't understand why his OOC friends were always following my character's lead instead of his and he concluded that, because he was a victim of bullying, he was quite susceptible about these things.

I left the group almost immediately.

[Zyzzyva]

Hey, I played a dumb-as-rocks Half-Orc Barbarian that willingly banged a Succubus. Rolled a natural 20 for Forititude, too. We got married later! Not even kidding.

That's a great story. :sabine::smallbiggrin: Half-orc barbarian: takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin'!

[Lamech]

Welcome to my worst player.

A bit of context: he was playing a NG Oracle of Life, a wise and charismatic individual touched by his goddess. The rest of the group was played by his OOC friends. My character (an NG Inquisitor of a goddess of freedom) recently paid a Druid to use Awaken on a rabbit (to provide a bit of comic relief and serve as a sidekick).

IC:
The group was back in town after a tough fight while investigating an infested mansion, to rest and resupply. The Inquisitor and the Oracle had no issue with each other; after a brief chat they decided to go to sleep. During the night the awakened rabbit took a dump on the Oracle's blanket. The morning after the Oracle tried to murder the awakened rabbit, but the Inquisitor saved her at the last moment. After the episode the Oracle was just a pain to deal with, threatening and insulting the Inquisitor without giving any explanation.

OOC:
After the game I was quite confused about the sudden change in behaviour. The explanation on why he played his character like that arrived a couple of days after the game, in a long wall of text that he wrote me on FB. Short story long, he said that the Inquisitor asked the awakened rabbit to take a dump on his character's blanket because I (as a player) was trying to humiliate him. At the same time he didn't understand why his OOC friends were always following my character's lead instead of his and he concluded that, because he was a victim of bullying, he was quite susceptible about these things.

I left the group almost immediately.It sounds like he might have gotten some bad info from his friends. But yeah, that's time to leave the group. Post-haste.

[Sith_Happens]

his response was something like "he'll make me his second in command because we are the same person"

That is the exact opposite of sound logic. If your first thought upon being given interdimensional travel is to assassinate one of your alternate universe counterparts, there's a good chance that said alternate universe counterpart is going to know that. You know, because he's you and therefore probably would have had the exact same thought in your shoes.

[MesiDoomstalker]

So my worst player isn't really bad. Just kind of frustrating. No matter the system, no matter if he built his character (not often) or if he's shown step by step how to play his (simple) character, he'll ultimately forget how to do it. Play a Paladin? "How do I Smite Evil?" Play a Fighter? "What's my bonuses to Hit again?" He can't play spellcasters, a mix of not having any idea what spells he wants and forgetting they exist in the first place and the horrid but easy to fall into trap of "I might need them later!" He's a great guy and probably the best RPer in the game. For those who lurk these forums eternally, he played the Pilot I killed last week and came to the forum to tell his epic tail. That encounter was impromtu but it was made to let him feel effective since he's generally not.

I guess the worst part is he doesn't make an effort to learn. During the battle, he kept asking what his class abilities did. I told him, months ago, to have his character sheet completely written out and know where his bonuses went. Which he didn't. We had to reverse engineer his Touch AC since all his AC's were identical (when they shouldn't). Just ... frustrating because I can't rightfully challenge the group because I'll steamroll him and push him out of the session. Such an encounter should threaten that, but the other players are so much better overall that he'll be tossed aside like a ragdoll in a truely difficult fight. The fact I killed him after 8 rounds of not utilizing my NPC's strengths (superior AC, physical scores, and damage output, invisibility and stealth/guerilla tactics) should say how effective he is.

He's just frustrating!

[NowhereMan583]

That is the exact opposite of sound logic. If your first thought upon being given interdimensional travel is to assassinate one of your alternate universe counterparts, there's a good chance that said alternate universe counterpart is going to know that. You know, because he's you and therefore probably would have had the exact same thought in your shoes.

If I had run this, the alternate universe counterpart would have ALREADY done it -- so they would know exactly what the PC was planning because they'd done nearly the exact same thing themselves.

For extra fun, they're actually on their fifth alternate-universe-counterpart assassination-based regime change, and the PC has to compete with yet more alternate versions of themselves who are also trying to assassinate their counterpart and take over. All of them look similar enough that none of them know who is who.

Honestly, whenever I see time-travel or alternate-dimension-hopping, my first thought is "let's make this some sort of absurd farce".

[Jay R]

Why wouldn't you willingly bang the succubus!

We had a player who did exactly that. The conversation after we rescued him was as follows.

Him: I had to - she was smokin' hot!
Me: Yeah, but that's supposed to be a metaphor.

[SimonMoon6]

Honestly, whenever I see time-travel or alternate-dimension-hopping, my first thought is "let's make this some sort of absurd farce".

Indeed. For example, in of my campaigns, just as the PCs were starting to gain the ability to visit alternate universes (with alternate versions of themselves, rather than just completely different universes), one of the first things that happened is that Evil versions of the PCs (with the same ability) visited their universe, to try to take over. (One of the PCs had *nearly* lost an encounter to a vampire, so his evil alternate self was a vampire version of himself.)

[Mr Beer]

The thing that confuses me about this story is that rabbit crap usually consists of small, dry, innocuous round pellets that would simply roll straight off.

Really, if you had to have your blanket crapped on by any mammal, a rabbit would probably be the best choice.


Welcome to my worst player.

A bit of context: he was playing a NG Oracle of Life, a wise and charismatic individual touched by his goddess. The rest of the group was played by his OOC friends. My character (an NG Inquisitor of a goddess of freedom) recently paid a Druid to use Awaken on a rabbit (to provide a bit of comic relief and serve as a sidekick). The DM played the awakened rabbit.

IC:
The group was back in town after a tough fight while investigating an infested mansion, to rest and resupply. The Inquisitor and the Oracle had no issue with each other; after a brief chat they decided to go to sleep. During the night the awakened rabbit took a dump on the Oracle's blanket. The morning after the Oracle tried to murder the awakened rabbit, but the Inquisitor saved her at the last moment. After the episode the Oracle was just a pain to deal with, threatening and insulting the Inquisitor without giving any explanation.

OOC:
After the game I was quite confused about the sudden change in behaviour. The explanation on why he played his character like that arrived a couple of days after the game, in a long wall of text that he wrote me on FB. Short story long, he said that the Inquisitor asked the awakened rabbit to take a dump on his character's blanket because I (as a player) was trying to humiliate him - it wasn't true, it was the DM's idea. At the same time he didn't understand why his OOC friends were always following my character's lead instead of his and he concluded that, because he was a victim of bullying, he was quite susceptible about these things.

I left the group almost immediately.

[Anonymouswizard]

The thing that confuses me about this story is that rabbit crap usually consists of small, dry, innocuous round pellets that would simply roll straight off.

Really, if you had to have your blanket crapped on by any mammal, a rabbit would probably be the best choice.

Depends, the first time they aren't, so the rabbit eats them and tries again.

[Engine]

The thing that confuses me about this story is that rabbit crap usually consists of small, dry, innocuous round pellets that would simply roll straight off.

Really, if you had to have your blanket crapped on by any mammal, a rabbit would probably be the best choice.

Yep, I know. The DM too, since she described them exactly like that.
But he still thought that it was some scheme to humiliate him.

[Cluedrew]

That is the exact opposite of sound logic.
True, I actually had a similar thought. I could see alternate versions of the same person working together (I have another friend who had developed a protocol in case he ever meets other versions of himself) but if you want to do it with world domination, you might have to be the benevolent dictator type. R's character concept was crime lord.

Another issue I had with it is that the different worlds were all independent of each other, we hadn't seen any "alternate versions" when R brought this up. I think... after the idea came up the GM started using some alternate versions of NPCs as fillers. But come to think of it I'm not entirely sure which happened first anymore.


If I had run this, the alternate universe counterpart would have ALREADY done it [...] "let's make this some sort of absurd farce".
Actually, the GM did something kind of cool. He created an "anti-party" to highlight some of problems with our group. Unfortunately he was still working on it when that campaign died. All I can remember for sure was CS's anti-character was scripted to try and kill us the moment we met him.

[Solaris]

True, I actually had a similar thought. I could see alternate versions of the same person working together (I have another friend who had developed a protocol in case he ever meets other versions of himself) but if you want to do it with world domination, you might have to be the benevolent dictator type. R's character concept was crime lord.

So he wasn't looking for his evil opposite, he was the evil opposite!

[Anonymouswizard]

If I had run this, the alternate universe counterpart would have ALREADY done it -- so they would know exactly what the PC was planning because they'd done nearly the exact same thing themselves.

For extra fun, they're actually on their fifth alternate-universe-counterpart assassination-based regime change, and the PC has to compete with yet more alternate versions of themselves who are also trying to assassinate their counterpart and take over. All of them look similar enough that none of them know who is who.

Even better, he arrives at the universe he's supposed to have conquered and kills himself, only to find out he's a wanted murderer. After having to fend off another version of himself, he discovers that the version from this world discovered world hopping tech, got restless, and went to look for a version of himself that had conquered the world to assassinate him and take his place.

[ComaVision]

Did he try to steal your SO during the game, or...? Because I smell a big, fat ulterior motive. :smalleek:


No that was last year, before DnD. The whole DnD kerfuffle happened last month by the way. He still has refused to see or speak to me, according to others, because he wishes to avoid conflict and he doesnt want me trying to get him to play again.

You are a far, far more tolerant man than I. There isn't the smallest chance that I would DM for someone that tried to steal my girlfriend, let alone have them in my house or put up with their complaining.

[Mr Beer]

Yep, I know. The DM too, since she described them exactly like that.
But he still thought that it was some scheme to humiliate him.

Oh well, when you have someone whose whole thing is being outraged, they'll find an excuse to make it happen.

[Keltest]

Yep, I know. The DM too, since she described them exactly like that.
But he still thought that it was some scheme to humiliate him.

Honestly, being pooped on by even a rabbit is still going to be humiliating. Maybe not as much as, say, a manticore, but it isn't going to be something you just ignore either.

[Engine]

Honestly, being pooped on by even a rabbit is still going to be humiliating. Maybe not as much as, say, a manticore, but it isn't going to be something you just ignore either.

Honestly, I expect a player to know the difference between IC and OOC: so if a rabbit took a dump on your character's blanket, I expect you - the player - to understand that it didn't really happened, it was just fiction and not throw any accusations around. And by the way: I had no part in what happened, it was the DM's idea without any prompting from me.

[Mr Beer]

It's amazing how an incredibly fun hobby like roleplaying can be totally ruined by a single bad player.

Lots of fun hobbies are like that, for example skydiving is less enjoyable if the single bad participant is the one who packs the chutes.

[BayardSPSR]

Lots of fun hobbies are like that, for example skydiving is less enjoyable if the single bad participant is the one who packs the chutes.

When you put it like that, having a single bad player really isn't that awful after all.

[Solaris]

When you put it like that, having a single bad player really isn't that awful after all.

Well, I imagine the bad player can make you suffer longer... though the bad rigger will make you suffer for the rest of your life.

[Lvl45DM!]

You are a far, far more tolerant man than I. There isn't the smallest chance that I would DM for someone that tried to steal my girlfriend, let alone have them in my house or put up with their complaining.

I bet you wouldn't DM a guy who would take a swing at you either. But imagine if it was like an anemic 6 year old taking a swing at you. Its such a pathetic attempt its hard to hold against them.
NOTE: This arrogance is only justified with THIS significant other. I am in no way this smug about anything else in my life.