PDA

View Full Version : Training up new roleplayers



WarKitty
2015-01-23, 04:16 PM
Something I've thought about from some previous threads - I've seen a lot of cases where new or inexperienced roleplayers can end up being disruptive to the game. It's not intentional, they don't mean to be a jerk, but they're caught between trying to do roleplaying (often something they're unsure of and not feeling very confident at) and often finding out that they annoy other players when they do. Quite frequently the player in question is not the most socially astute to begin with.

Often this ends up with the character that just doesn't work. Sometimes it's the character who's just incapable of being serious. Sometimes it's a character that's too inflexible. Almost always it's a character that has one "thing" that basically sums them up, and either tries to push it into everything or gets bored and disengaged when their shtick isn't relevant.

Now, in this case, we're presuming that the player in question is trying not to be a jerk. We're also presuming they're trying to roleplay - they're just not very good at it. And it gets annoying, but solely negative feedback often results in the player withdrawing into pure mechanics mode, due to lack of knowing what else to do.

So - how would you go about encouraging this sort of player to move to roleplay that works better in the group?

Beta Centauri
2015-01-23, 04:27 PM
Lead by example.

When they do something you like, encourage that.

Make them aware of any out-of-game issues you're having with their choices, but do it with a desire not to shut them down but to see if some slight change to the way the game is played would alter their behavior.

Make sure that the player is never punished for roleplaying, such as by the game dead-ending or becoming boring for them. It might be proper for the character to punished, but if the player doesn't find that fun, look for a different consequence for the character.

Good luck.

Honest Tiefling
2015-01-23, 04:31 PM
If they're not doing it intentionally, point out how it is making other people not enjoy the game. They might not realize what they are doing. But also offer suggestions and positive feedback for when they do things right. Perhaps something like a Rule of Cool moment or a Hero Point system to give mechanical bonuses for good roleplay with the party. If you hit them constantly with the stick, they won't have fun.

And don't sweat goofy on their first game. Run a goofy game and slowly start to put in more serious moments. Don't discourage them, but run with it occasionally.

WarKitty
2015-01-23, 05:29 PM
Make sure that the player is never punished for roleplaying, such as by the game dead-ending or becoming boring for them. It might be proper for the character to punished, but if the player doesn't find that fun, look for a different consequence for the character.

The biggest difficulty I've had for this one is bringing the character in, when their primary deal isn't immediately and obviously relevant. So an example might be, a stereotypical elf ranger. Loves trees, loves archery, thinks other races are inferior. Now you want a bit of the game to take place in the city - the player just checks out, or tries to find reasons to leave the city as soon as possible. It's not what the character was built for, so the player has no idea what to do with them.

Though it occurs to me as I type that one solution there might be to bring in his thing in a more tangential way. You're in the city to find out about the duke's plans. Well, it turns out the duke is an avid hunter, and he's staging a grand tournament in just a few days! The winner is sure to gain his favor. They'd have to be a really good archer though, and be able to get through the woods.

Honest Tiefling
2015-01-23, 05:32 PM
Or...Give the Player a little more info before making his character. Did he know it would be a city campaign when he made his elf?

WarKitty
2015-01-23, 05:35 PM
Or...Give the Player a little more info before making his character. Did he know it would be a city campaign when he made his elf?

Who said it was a city campaign? Unless you're running a very short adventure, you're likely to end up in a lot of different settings over the course of the campaign.

Beta Centauri
2015-01-23, 05:36 PM
The biggest difficulty I've had for this one is bringing the character in, when their primary deal isn't immediately and obviously relevant. So an example might be, a stereotypical elf ranger. Loves trees, loves archery, thinks other races are inferior. Now you want a bit of the game to take place in the city - the player just checks out, or tries to find reasons to leave the city as soon as possible. It's not what the character was built for, so the player has no idea what to do with them. Oh, yeah, that's a classic problem.

"My character talks things out."
"Great. Roll initiative."

"My character is a doctor."
"Fine. Let's get started on this heist."

It often occurs when the GM implies that the players can make anything they want, but doesn't make it clear what kind of adventure they want to run, or which kinds of characters will be appropriate. I've run into problems with this even when I've been careful to be really, really clear.


Though it occurs to me as I type that one solution there might be to bring in his thing in a more tangential way. You're in the city to find out about the duke's plans. Well, it turns out the duke is an avid hunter, and he's staging a grand tournament in just a few days! The winner is sure to gain his favor. They'd have to be a really good archer though, and be able to get through the woods. Yep, that's great, and the secret to it is: the GM doesn't have to be the only one to come up with that solution. If the player doesn't like where the game is headed, ask for their input on what would make the game more interesting for them. Ask for everyone's input, and be open to it.

WarKitty
2015-01-23, 05:51 PM
Oh, yeah, that's a classic problem.

"My character talks things out."
"Great. Roll initiative."

"My character is a doctor."
"Fine. Let's get started on this heist."

It often occurs when the GM implies that the players can make anything they want, but doesn't make it clear what kind of adventure they want to run, or which kinds of characters will be appropriate. I've run into problems with this even when I've been careful to be really, really clear.

The problem as I'm seeing is not whether the character itself is appropriate (it often is), but that the character is frequently very one-dimensional when the campaign is not. It's a player who is told it's going to be a stealth and intrigue campaign, and builds a character whose identity is that they're a thief. A thief character is great for that game; a character who doesn't participate in anything that's not pickpocketting or breaking and entering is sort of annoying. A character who gets bored trying to figure out where the duke hid the jewels and decides to start picking pockets instead when the guards are watching is really annoying.


Yep, that's great, and the secret to it is: the GM doesn't have to be the only one to come up with that solution. If the player doesn't like where the game is headed, ask for their input on what would make the game more interesting for them. Ask for everyone's input, and be open to it.

Sometimes I've found the player doesn't actually know what they'd like. Or to put it better, the new player is often very focused on what they built their character to do. The dichotomy in their heads is often "do the one thing I built my character around" or "don't do anything." What the GM has to do is challenge that barrier.

Beta Centauri
2015-01-23, 06:35 PM
The problem as I'm seeing is not whether the character itself is appropriate (it often is), but that the character is frequently very one-dimensional when the campaign is not. It's a player who is told it's going to be a stealth and intrigue campaign, and builds a character whose identity is that they're a thief. A thief character is great for that game; a character who doesn't participate in anything that's not pickpocketting or breaking and entering is sort of annoying. A character who gets bored trying to figure out where the duke hid the jewels and decides to start picking pockets instead when the guards are watching is really annoying. Yes, I agree. But it can be annoying for them for their one-dimensional character (which is very likely based on a one-dimensional character from their favorite fiction) to be left high and dry during large portions of the game. It's fine to have a multi-dimensional game, but fiction is full of multi-dimensional stories with one-dimensional characters; the author finds ways to make those characters relevant. The author might also slowly change the character to give it more dimension, but probably not in the first season.

Also, in a class-based game, it's not surprising for a player to identify their character with that class. If that's a problem, I see it more that the adventure isn't geared toward the system it was written for.


Sometimes I've found the player doesn't actually know what they'd like. Or to put it better, the new player is often very focused on what they built their character to do. The dichotomy in their heads is often "do the one thing I built my character around" or "don't do anything." What the GM has to do is challenge that barrier. The GM can also challenge themselves to make that "barrier" an opportunity for their game. In the early short term, the GM might as well pander to the character, let the player use the character for what they built it for. Once the player is a little tired of that, they'll be more receptive to the idea of situations that respond better to different tactics.

goto124
2015-01-23, 08:41 PM
Any... examples to illustrate it?

WarKitty
2015-01-23, 09:16 PM
Any... examples to illustrate it?

So one is, say, you tell players this is going to be an intrigue and roleplaying game. Player comes to the table with a thief, build pretty much all focused on stuff like lockpicking and pickpocketting and such. They get a quest is to steal a particularly ancient crown. They know who's in charge of the storage but not where it is. They're going to have to figure it out somehow. The new player just sort of checks out and waits for the rest of the party to figure out the location, possibly amusing himself by pickpocketting random NPC's for minor loot. If asked he complains that there's nothing for him to do

New player makes some sort of champion character; often this is a paladin or cleric but not always. Their goal in life is Being Good. The party comes to some sort of moral choice. One I've experienced is, do you kill bad guys or let them go, once you've won? (Presume there's no legal system to take them back to and no real way for characters to control and keep track of them for any sort of rehabilitation.) Whichever side that particular character falls on, they will insist that's the way it has to be done. If the group doesn't go along, the character descends into passivity, functioning in combat but nothing else. When asked the player says the group wasn't letting her roleplay so she doesn't want to keep trying.

A new player thinks a fun, jokey character is the way to go. While normally functional in combat, the extend of this character's personality is "I'm whacky!" Often they do things that make little sense in order to get laughs - one example I've had was the character attempted "diplomacy" with a tribe they needed help from, by taking some severed wolf heads and putting on a puppet show. Again, if pushed to stop the player just checks out completely. Frequently this one is backed by "well I don't really know how to do all that roleplaying stuff, so I thought I'd just have some fun."

Honest Tiefling
2015-01-23, 09:34 PM
Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that the players tried to roleplay (Or in the case of the heist, contribute), but felt shut down. They might not have known what to do, once their first attempts were squashed (not for bad reasons, mind you). How do you approach the players on the subject? And, equally important...How do the other players react? Some people don't react well to what is meant as gentle ribbing, and others might feel uncomfortable RPing in the first place.

In the case of moon logic, I ain't got a clue, however. I've had to deal with a player like that and...I have no ****ing idea what can be done if they don't agree that severed head puppetry is not aiding in diplomacy.

WarKitty
2015-01-23, 09:51 PM
Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that the players tried to roleplay (Or in the case of the heist, contribute), but felt shut down. They might not have known what to do, once their first attempts were squashed (not for bad reasons, mind you). How do you approach the players on the subject? And, equally important...How do the other players react? Some people don't react well to what is meant as gentle ribbing, and others might feel uncomfortable RPing in the first place.

That's sort of the point of this thread. I've seen a lot of threads on how to handle the player who is just being a selfish jerk. However as a DM I've dealt more commonly with players who just don't know what they're doing, and withdraw when their first attempts don't work. And I'm honestly not that sure how to deal with it in a way that brings them out of their shell without annoying everyone else.


In the case of moon logic, I ain't got a clue, however. I've had to deal with a player like that and...I have no ****ing idea what can be done if they don't agree that severed head puppetry is not aiding in diplomacy.

It's not that they think it's helping. It's that they think a whacky character who does inappropriate things is a really fun roleplaying concept that everyone will enjoy - they expect it to result in funny hijinks. (It's actually this sort I've found often hides the most nervous or insecure player.)