Problem player...

[Backseatgamer]

I am a newish DM and I have a very common problem: one of my players has a tendency to break the game.

Now when I say he "tends to break the game", what I'm actually saying is that he tries his hardest to do so. Up until recently, he would only ever play a rogue with the highest INT score he could get. He's a very smart guy, so he always has a high intelligence no matter what character he plays. That way he can use his own personal intelligence for his character.

Now, however, he has taken a liking to arcane casters. His wizard is ridiculous and his sorcerer is impossible. His favorite spell is simulacrum and we've had to nerf it immensely. Yet he still finds a way to break it.

But the worse problem of all is that he knows how to use logic against the DM's rulings. I understand that arcane casters have reality bending powers, but I'm pretty sure he shouldn't be breaking reality quite yet. What do I do?

[Amphetryon]

What should you do? Ask/tell him to stop. The problem appears to be an out-of-game issue, with a particular Player's personality. Ask him to stop being disruptive.

[The Evil DM]

The problem may not only be the player. If they are nerfing simulacrum it means they are playing higher level games with a "Newish" GM.

The problem is this GM is unprepared for the consequences of higher level magic wielding toons and how they can bend the rules of the game. I would recommend that this GM go back to level 1 for a while and learn how to play the basics before integrating more complex material.

It is a common mistake by inexperienced GM's to rush to the heroic and epic gaming before they have the skills to manage the options players have.

[BWR]

Solve OOC problems OOC. If the player is a pain, talk to him about it. Say he needs to tone it down or you will be forced to take steps to make the game more manageable for you. The point of the game is for everyone to have fun and he's intentionally ruining things for everyone else. Even if he is merely trying to play the system and not intentionally make things unfun for everyone else, that's the result.
Just making new rulings about individual spells and combos and whatnot as they occur is not going to work against someone who is basically just trying to maximize the system without any concern for anyone else.

[Vrakk]

I feel your pain. I've been there and it sucks. You're only trying to run a game so others(and hopefully yourself) have fun but it ends up being stressful and not fun.

I agree that the best approach is to talk to the player and ask him to tone it down. Tell him that you don't feel you have the experience as a GM to deal with the crazy stuff. You can also ask him to take over as GM, play it up that with as smart as he is he could come up with great encounters.

[Nibbens]

The problem may not only be the player. If they are nerfing simulacrum it means they are playing higher level games with a "Newish" GM.

The problem is this GM is unprepared for the consequences of higher level magic wielding toons and how they can bend the rules of the game. I would recommend that this GM go back to level 1 for a while and learn how to play the basics before integrating more complex material.

It is a common mistake by inexperienced GM's to rush to the heroic and epic gaming before they have the skills to manage the options players have.

This is the same thing I thought when I read the original post. No insult to you OP, but if you've never DMed a higher level game before, then you will be unprepared for the slap-tastic shenanigans that high level characters (especially casters) can pull off.

I always feel that the true response to any superpowered thing a PC can pull off is "good, you'll need it" and then adjust your game accordingly. The problem with this response is that if you're too heavy handed with your tweaking of the gameworld it becomes obvious, and your PCs feel cheated. If you don't do enough, then the problem exacerbates.

You see, the issue is not "how do I nerf" or "how do I deal with this player" but "how does my game world need to respond" and "how do I do so without alerting my PCs that I'm manipulating the behind the scene numbers and mechanics to 'deal with' the 'problem player'."

In order to properly counter argue the overpowered tricks he's pulling with simulacrum, you need to know how to handle it - and just reading forums isn't a good way to learn. You need trial and error and you need to see power levels at all stages of the game so you can adequately judge what is appropriate and fair.

[Milo the Gnome]

Seconding a prior comment with something we say often in my group. The goal is to have have fun with your friends. If you're playing DnD to "win," you've already lost.

[Eldaran]

I always feel that the true response to any superpowered thing a PC can pull off is "good, you'll need it" and then adjust your game accordingly. The problem with this response is that if you're too heavy handed with your tweaking of the gameworld it becomes obvious, and your PCs feel cheated. If you don't do enough, then the problem exacerbates.

You see, the issue is not "how do I nerf" or "how do I deal with this player" but "how does my game world need to respond" and "how do I do so without alerting my PCs that I'm manipulating the behind the scene numbers and mechanics to 'deal with' the 'problem player'."

This is great advice, players are supposed to be powerful, and spellcasters are supposed to be able to do ridiculous game breaking things, that's kind of their whole point. The problem arises when they're overshadowing the other players in the party, if you've got a wizard in a party with a rogue and fighter, the martial types are going to be overshadowed. Maybe try empowering the weaker members of the party rather than nerfing the strong player.

[Nibbens]

Now, however, he has taken a liking to arcane casters. His wizard is ridiculous and his sorcerer is impossible. His favorite spell is simulacrum and we've had to nerf it immensely. Yet he still finds a way to break it.

I'm curious to know what exactly he is doing to "break the game" with simulacrum, and any other examples.

Secondly, if he is trying to derail the game, then this is an OOC problem that should be handled outside of the game.

[Xervous]

As DnD 3.5 is a game overflowing with a multitude of options it's naturally harder to deal with the average higher level party than a lower level party. The range of power levels just goes up the more choice is involved. Thus it is almost always easier to run lower level campaigns when not all players+DM have a firm grasp of how things should run.

One thing that can make any RPG unbelievably better if you can get your players (and you!) to understand it is that all the numbers are relative. You don't need to be playing a level 20 character to feel powerful and important. The levels just set the scale of the adventure, it's the actual content of the adventure that should make them feel challenged and rewarded.

[ShaneMRoth]

... I am a newish DM ...

... the worse problem of all is that he knows how to use logic against the DM's rulings. ...

"Please let me do my job."

Those are the Magic Words.

Not, "I'm the DM, so I'm right."

Not, "You are wrong."

Just, "Please let me do my job."

Once you are satisfied that you have heard this player out, invoke the Magic Words. At the game table.

This seems like a case of a Puppet DM. This player wants all of the standing authority of the DM without any of the paperwork or any ownership of the consequences.

This player needs to extend you the courtesy of allowing you to fulfill your duties as the DM.

You need to be able to make a ruling, and have that ruling stand, without provoking a protracted parliamentary debate on the nature of the rules that makes C-SPAN seem like an episode of The Wire by comparison.

[Broken Crown]

I am a newish DM and I have a very common problem: one of my players has a tendency to break the game.

3.X comes pre-broken; very little player input is required. The way the rules are designed enables powers to stack and enhance each other to a much greater degree than in other editions. Most players will quickly notice this and take advantage of it. (The designers seem to have made, at best, only token efforts to prevent this. Given that WotC also brought us "Magic: The Gathering," I suspect they actually meant for the game to be played this way.)


I understand that arcane casters have reality bending powers, but I'm pretty sure he shouldn't be breaking reality quite yet. What do I do?

If your PCs are casting 8th level spells, then, yes, they will be breaking reality. It's a "feature" of the game's design.

As others have said, it's a problem for new DMs: There's a vast amount of core and supporting material for 3.X, and it interacts in ways that aren't always obvious at first glance, sometimes with ridiculously powerful effects. It's hard to anticipate what the players may come up with. There are so many options that specific nerfs aren't much help in the long run. And much of it is perfectly rules-legal even with less-than-generous interpretations of the rules.

A few things you can do:

- Decide what "power level" you feel is appropriate to your game, and put a hard cap on character power. "E6" (maximum 6th level, with characters getting bonus feats but no further levels with increased experience) is a popular option. Alternately, try a different system that fits better mechanically with the setting you're trying to create.

- Veto characters on a case-by-case basis. This is recommended in many point-based systems, like HERO System and M&M, but D&D 3.X is flexible enough to justify it, too. This does require some system mastery, though; before you can veto something, you need to be able to recognize it as broken. (One DM I knew vetoed monks – which are broken, just in the opposite direction.)

- For some players, character building is a fun game in its own right: How can I use the rules to do such-and-such? It sounds as though your "problem player" is one of these. Explain to your player that character optimization, while fun, is an entirely different game from role-playing, which requires cooperation with the DM and fellow players in order to work. Characters which are excellent from an optimization point of view are not necessarily well-suited to actual play.

- To take the previous point a little further: What do your players want from the game? Is it the same as what you want? Or are there inherent conflicts in your expectations? Be sure to have this conversation with all of your players, preferably before they become "problem players," and there will be a lot fewer problems.


But the worse problem of all is that he knows how to use logic against the DM's rulings.

- Well, you're the DM; do you agree with his logic? If not, you have the power to say, "We'll discuss this after the game. For now, my ruling is ___." No sense in wasting valuable game time in rules arguments.

[Amphetryon]

"Please let me do my job."

Those are the Magic Words.

Not, "I'm the DM, so I'm right."

Not, "You are wrong."

Just, "Please let me do my job."

Once you are satisfied that you have heard this player out, invoke the Magic Words. At the game table.

This seems like a case of a Puppet DM. This player wants all of the standing authority of the DM without any of the paperwork or any ownership of the consequences.

This player needs to extend you the courtesy of allowing you to fulfill your duties as the DM.

You need to be able to make a ruling, and have that ruling stand, without provoking a protracted parliamentary debate on the nature of the rules that makes C-SPAN seem like an episode of The Wire by comparison.
"Unless someone is paying you to sit behind that DM screen, it's not your job. Stop trying to make yourself sound more important than us by calling it your 'job.'"

[ShaneMRoth]

"Unless someone is paying you to sit behind that DM screen, it's not your job. Stop trying to make yourself sound more important than us by calling it your 'job.'"

That is what a problem player would say...


I'd let those words hang in the air for a second or two and then say...


"So... you're not going to let me do my job then?"

[Threadnaught]

Start at level 1, ban him from using Magic unless it's from looted Magic Items.

Probably try sticking to E6 or some other low power variant, in order to prevent him from abusing too much stuff. Keep a copy of his character sheet and have it on hand. Don't discriminate, do it for all the players, it's the only way you'll simultaneously know what they're all capable of, be able to support the ones unable to pull their own weight and spot a cheater at once.
Rule 0 is important. If the player in question decides to break the game by trying to get infinite free Wishes at level 1, the line "Rule 0 chum, the universe will kill you without a save if you try that, because the universe doesn't want to revolve around one special snowflake, when there are Y other people in this party of X."

Remember that, you are allowed to ban anything. This is not to say, that you should ban every Class but Fighter, because there would be no greater cruelty. No, don't be too ban happy or house rule heavy, unless the Campaign is designed specifically for those bans and house rules.
Though it would be best to remember that some options players have access to, are better than others. The no Magic rule is one such example.
I suggest first of all, slapping any player who suggests the problem player take Leadership as a Feat, using the full weight of Core. Throw your back into it.
If the problem player themselves tries to use Leadership, do the same thing, but with every splat you have access to, if any.
I shouldn't need to say this, but my suggestions that you brutally assault your players should be taken about as seriously, as a player demanding 9th level Spells on a low level mundane.

[Keltest]

That is what a problem player would say...


I'd let those words hang in the air for a second or two and then say...


"So... you're not going to let me do my job then?"

Unless im mistaken, the "disruption" is that the DM is utterly unprepared for the kind of gameplay that is going on, not that the problem player is deliberately trying to be disruptive. Its not a matter of "letting the DM do his job", its a matter of whether or not the DM is equipped to do it.

[Threadnaught]

"Unless someone is paying you to sit behind that DM screen, it's not your job. Stop trying to make yourself sound more important than us by calling it your 'job.'"

Job=/=Employment.
Duty=/=Employment.
Work=/=Employment.


There are many things we must, or choose to do in our lives that require a substantial amount of effort, for which there is no financial compensation.
The lack of financial compensation does not invalidate any effort involved, nor does every job warrant a financial award.


Let's not get stuck on semantics, please?

[Sir Chuckles]

That is what a problem player would say...


I'd let those words hang in the air for a second or two and then say...


"So... you're not going to let me do my job then?"

Here's what I would respond with:
"What, exactly, is your job?"

[Darth Ultron]

This just sounds like your playing at too high a level. If your a new DM, stick to low level.

[Amphetryon]

Job=/=Employment.
Duty=/=Employment.
Work=/=Employment.


There are many things we must, or choose to do in our lives that require a substantial amount of effort, for which there is no financial compensation.
The lack of financial compensation does not invalidate any effort involved, nor does every job warrant a financial award.


Let's not get stuck on semantics, please?

Three guesses as to why I phrased my response within quotation marks.

[atemu1234]

Three guesses as to why I phrased my response within quotation marks.

Who were you quoting? It's not a +5 Shield of Ignore Criticism.

[Platymus Pus]

S

Remember that, you are allowed to ban anything. This is not to say, that you should ban every Class but Fighter, because there would be no greater cruelty..

Wouldn't that be only allowing Monk? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zXDo4dL7SU)

Who were you quoting? It's not a +5 Shield of Ignore Criticism.

He means that the quotation is a supposed response from a player, not him and the criticism shouldn't exist to begin with since it's directed at him.
The person who directed the response at him missed the context completely.
And as keltest put it with the GM

Unless im mistaken, the "disruption" is that the DM is utterly unprepared for the kind of gameplay that is going on, not that the problem player is deliberately trying to be disruptive. Its not a matter of "letting the DM do his job", its a matter of whether or not the DM is equipped to do it.
Onto the OP.

I am a newish DM and I have a very common problem: one of my players has a tendency to break the game.

Now when I say he "tends to break the game", what I'm actually saying is that he tries his hardest to do so. Up until recently, he would only ever play a rogue with the highest INT score he could get. He's a very smart guy, so he always has a high intelligence no matter what character he plays. That way he can use his own personal intelligence for his character.

Now, however, he has taken a liking to arcane casters. His wizard is ridiculous and his sorcerer is impossible. His favorite spell is simulacrum and we've had to nerf it immensely. Yet he still finds a way to break it.

But the worse problem of all is that he knows how to use logic against the DM's rulings. I understand that arcane casters have reality bending powers, but I'm pretty sure he shouldn't be breaking reality quite yet. What do I do?
Casters can nuke cities and wipe them off the map with people at level 9 or 10 if they feel like it. Worse things than that if they like. Onto your concerns.
http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=12038.0
Rogue, wizard, Sorcerer. Where does this lead us too?
http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1255476
I think your player just does his research or is taking advantage of rules that may not actually work.
If he's smart you should give him something hard to ponder on that isn't a dragon to slay, but a question.
The arcane deals more with the mind than the physical or possibly threats to the outer planes that only he can clearly face and has been called to.
A wizard has better things to be doing than stomping around the mortal realm when the rest of the party can deal with it.

[Firest Kathon]

I'm curious to know what exactly he is doing to "break the game" with simulacrum, and any other examples.

Rogue, wizard, Sorcerer. Where does this lead us too?
http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1255476
I think your player just does his research or is taking advantage of rules that may not actually work.
It seems that this post (http://community.wizards.com/comment/20370961#comment-20370961) in the mentioned thread describes the simulacrum stacking "trick".

In my opinion, the trick will not work because:

The share spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/sorcererWizard.htm#familiarShareSpells) ability states: "[The caster] may have any spell [...] he casts on himself also affect his familiar." The simulacrum may be a copy of your familiar, but it is not your familiar and as such you cannot share spells with it.
The same is true for it's HD, it is not your familiar and therefor its HD are not tied to your own and are halved with each iteration.
Even if share spells would work, it does not work with the free Simulacrum trick via CoI wish, as the spell is then cast by the Efreeti but Share Spells allows you only to share spells which you cast (you could wish for a scroll of simulacrum, though).


Edited to add: Also, the author of that forum post mentions a few more problems (http://community.wizards.com/comment/20370976#comment-20370976) themselves.

[Tohsaka Rin]

It seems like 50% of my posts on this forum are always the same advice.

If there's a problem, TALK TO the player.

Not AT them.

Just discuss it privately, one on one. Ask them if they could tone it down a little, as they're already playing one of the more (if not most) powerful classes in the game.

Ask them what their goals are, why they're doing it.

It could be the DM is doing something that makes the player feel powerless, or railroaded (and might just be subjective. A good discussion usually clears up mis-conceptions), it could be they feel like they're being ignored (again, could just be unintentional, the loudest players tend to drown out the quiet ones, and it's not always intentionally so), it could be a few things.

A good talk doesn't always solve problems, but it does usually bring them to light, so that everyone can work together to solve them.

It's a 'Collaborative storytelling experience' not 'players vs DM; who can be the biggest jerk'.

When everyone has fun, everyone wins.

[Ger. Bessa]

If you have a problem player, the simulacrum could instead become Orcus.

Sorry, the thread name and the fact that your gitp avatar is a monk forced me to bring jedipotter's old thread.

The main problem appears to be that your player visited this forum and answered to each of your challenges with "ice assassin". Ensuring that everybody has the same expectatiobs should solve the issue.

If he just brings out the big guns because he doesn't like to "loose", you could plan challenges that threaten less your PC's health/loot and more their reputations/centers of intetest (they're alive but their country is overrun by invaders...)

[Segev]

Step one is to talk to him. This is hopefully obvious, but it always bears a certain amount of repetition just in case. Lay out the problem he is presenting. Don't be adversarial if you can avoid it; instead, try asking him for advice. You are trying to provide a game to the players; if he makes it impossible, ask him how he would handle the situation of a character like his.

As a corollary to this, see if the other players are having fun or getting annoyed. If the latter, point this out, and again, ask him to help you make a game that's fun for everyone. If they seem to be having fun, then ask yourself why what's happening is a problem. The answer could be that you are having less fun. If so, try to identify why. As DM, everybody's fun is part of your responsibility. "Everybody" includes you.

In theory, you're all friends, and he should be sympathetic. IF he is not, and he really is disrupting the game, then you may need to remove him from it.

Step two is to learn the game mechanics. This is nontrivial, but knowing precisely what he can do, what the limits of his abilities are, and what you can have monsters and dungeons and BBEGs do will help you build things in response to his powers. Part of it is to ask yourself, "In a world where people can do what he's doing, what countermeasures - preferably using the rules as written - might be employed?"

[Mendicant]

Step one is to talk to him. This is hopefully obvious, but it always bears a certain amount of repetition just in case. Lay out the problem he is presenting. Don't be adversarial if you can avoid it; instead, try asking him for advice. You are trying to provide a game to the players; if he makes it impossible, ask him how he would handle the situation of a character like his.

As a corollary to this, see if the other players are having fun or getting annoyed. If the latter, point this out, and again, ask him to help you make a game that's fun for everyone. If they seem to be having fun, then ask yourself why what's happening is a problem. The answer could be that you are having less fun. If so, try to identify why. As DM, everybody's fun is part of your responsibility. "Everybody" includes you.

In theory, you're all friends, and he should be sympathetic. IF he is not, and he really is disrupting the game, then you may need to remove him from it.

Step two is to learn the game mechanics. This is nontrivial, but knowing precisely what he can do, what the limits of his abilities are, and what you can have monsters and dungeons and BBEGs do will help you build things in response to his powers. Part of it is to ask yourself, "In a world where people can do what he's doing, what countermeasures - preferably using the rules as written - might be employed?"

I disagree on one point. Talking to the player should always be step two. Step one should be carefully discerning the nature of the problem, IE what you describe in your second paragraph. You absolutely need to have a very clear idea of what you consider the problem to be, and why you consider it a problem, before you initiate any conversation about it. My first reaction was the same as a lot of people in this thread: a newer DM should probably hold off on playing high-level D&D until he or she has a really strong grasp of the rules. (Personally, I don't like playing past ~lvl 10 much anyway.) That's much of a solution unless the players who presumably put a lot of time into building their 13th+ level characters are on board with it though. Neither is recalibrating the challenges a useful response if that's going to destroy or obsolete the group's nonwizards. The DM can't expect the problem to be resolved through a conversation unless he has more to say than "stop breaking the game."

[ShaneMRoth]

...
If there's a problem, TALK TO the player.

Not AT them.
...



...
Step one is to talk to him. This is hopefully obvious, but it always bears a certain amount of repetition just in case.
...

This is fundamentally sound advice.

And while this advice is an excellent place to start, it doesn't seem really address what the OP is describing.

The OP is describing a player who ranges somewhere on the problem spectrum between a Munchkin and a Rules Lawyer.

I've seen players like this. I've been a Rules Lawyer (I got over it). But I've never treated a DM like a puppet, which is what the OP seems to be describing.

I'm willing to assume the player is not a Munchkin (which infers planned malice). If he's a Munchkin, then he just needs to go.

Most players on the problem spectrum seem to be blissfully unaware of their impact on the game experience. They are not generally acting out of malice. This player might be under the impression that he is helping the OP become a better DM. (He is making the OP a better DM, just not in the way he seems to think.)

If the player is a min/maxer (or Optimizer, I suppose), then his entire style of play is predicated on getting the maximum mechanical efficiency out of the rules for the benefit of his character. This generally falls under the Too Much Of A Good Thing category. The trick here is to get him to tone down his approach at the game table without indicting his play style.


"I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that flamethrower. That is one sweet flamethrower. Nor am I suggesting there is any flaw in your flamethrowing technique. You are throwing the crap out of those flames. I'm just saying that it might not be the best approach to getting rid of cockroaches in the kitchen. Oh, there are definitely no more cockroaches in the kitchen... you get no argument from me on that point. It's just that... did I mention how nice that flamethrower is? I did? Good..."

[ekarney]

Alternatively if none of that works, tell he has free reign to do whatever he wants on the condition he has the Pig Bond flaw and can't retrain, and the pig is constantly generating a 10' anti-magic field.

That way if he ever moves out of the field to cast, he gets flayed alive by Orcus, Then you just implement the "No using the same class/character more than once in a campaign.

That's only for extreme situations though, if he's being a total jerk, otherwise I recommend talking to him.

[Segev]

If the player is a min/maxer (or Optimizer, I suppose), then his entire style of play is predicated on getting the maximum mechanical efficiency out of the rules for the benefit of his character. This generally falls under the Too Much Of A Good Thing category. The trick here is to get him to tone down his approach at the game table without indicting his play style.


Yes, but if that's all it is, again, talking with him should work. I am an optimizer and shameless powergamer, myself. However, I also recognize that different games have different needs. I generally try to work with a GM and let him know what I see myself as doing with the rules as provided, and offering suggestions if I think there's a potential problem. If he sees a problem, I will try to make sure I understand it and build to avoid triggering it.

Being a powergamer doesn't mean you have to be a jerk.

If he's out to "win" the game and thinks he's "beating" you and won't cooperate, though...he's being a jerk. Or at least, he wants the game to be something it isn't (at least, not as you run it), and should leave the game.

[prufock]

Play e (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?206323-E6-The-Game-Inside-D-amp-D)6 instead. It uses most of the general D&D rules, but only goes to level 6 with characters gaining extra feats after that. Granted, the player will probably still try to break the system, but his job becomes much more difficult.

[Yahzi]

As everyone has said, talking to the players come first. "Breaking the game" is only a problem if it's a problem for you and/or the other players.

That said, the simplest and easiest way to find out how to counter the player's absurd schemes is... imitation. If he convinces you and the rest of the group that a rule should allow him to do something absurd, then fine: very shortly after that, the NPCs start doing it too!

About 5 minutes after your NPCs pull some cheap trick over on the PCs, you will be handed veritable bucket-loads of ways to prevent it from working.