PDA

View Full Version : Gamer Drama Player ragequit my group last night



Geddy2112
2015-09-23, 03:42 PM
So, last night, a player rage quit my local group. Most of the night he seemed totally fine, but as me and him were in the kitchen he said to me "I'm done. The DM is targeting me. I'm just done." It was mid combat, and his character simply stopped doing anything. Shortly after the combat was over he said "I have to go" and quickly left. A friend of mine, I texted him if something was wrong. He told me he won't be coming back because of the way the DM was unfair to him. He texted my DM to "lose his number and that the session was horse ****". We he left, we were all a little bit confused and somewhat shocked. It was our first session of a new campaign, and for first sessions it went pretty typical. Start in a tavern, fight some orc/goblins, etc.

He has expressed to me and the DM instances that his character were "targeted" were:

-He asked an NPC to gamble with him, the NPC declined.

-He had a gold stolen by another NPC in a bar when he put it down on the table and looked away(he was given a perception check to notice the grab).

-He sat down next to an NPC sitting alone. The NPC politely asked him to leave. Same thing happened to 2 other PC's when they did the same thing.

-He initiated the knife game(where you rapidly stab between your fingers) with an obviously higher level NPC, and lost. A gold. He was told in detail that this NPC seems to have single items worth more than all of yours combined, he rolled open checks and described this NPC as powerful and very good with a knife. The NPC even gave him back his gold when he lost.

-Another NPC gave him a dirty look, but she was giving everyone in the tavern dirty looks.

-The bar owner had a pet chicken, which looked at him funny.

-He stabbed a goblin in combat, and the goblin screamed "B***h" at him.

-He ran past a goblin, provoking an attack of opportunity. Said goblin had no weapon having been disarmed the previous round. The goblin rolled 2 natural 20's to score a critical hit for 4 nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. The DM warned him "now, your movement will provoke an attack of opportunity" and the player said "okay."

-He ran past the goblin towards an orc with a small cannon. He was the closest to the orc, it was combat, and he had a weapon drawn. The orc shot at him and did ~1/2 of his HP in damage. He failed a save and was knocked prone by the shot. At this point he gives up. The orc seemed to have trouble reloading the gun before the shot prior and missed another party member wildly. This time, the orc had no trouble loading the gun and hit. He argues that this was deliberate targeting by the DM, and gives up at this point.


The thing is, nobody had a problem with him at all. Honestly, everyone liked him and his character. He had an amazing backstory, his character was a great mix up, and he was incredibly effective and a team player in combat. We all enjoyed having him around, and for the most part thought he was enjoying the game(I could tell later on this was not the case). We are unanimously sad to see him go.

He sincerely thinks the DM hates him and is soloing him out for mistreatment. And the fact that "I won't side with him against the DM obviously playing favorites" means he has no place in our game. The DM explained that it was just chance, and the NPC's natural reactions to those situations. The DM and I, along with the other players, are totally okay with him coming back, but he insists that he is done with us. He has played with us before, although it has been a while as life has gotten in the way, but he swears he will never play with any of us ever again.

Have you had this situation happen before? Are we horribly off base in our gaming group?

Hazrond
2015-09-23, 04:37 PM
the only two things i saw here which might have been out of place (and mostly because of the eldritch AOO rules) were the attacks of opportunityy with the ranged weapon and unarmed strike, both of which require specific feats to threaten (and therefore flank/take AOOs)

Aetol
2015-09-23, 06:11 PM
^ What he said.

Otherwise... he "will never play with any of [you] ever again" ? And that's all the reasons he gave ? Talk about overreaction. Are you sure there's not something else that ticked him off that he wouldn't want to express ?

veti
2015-09-23, 06:15 PM
By your account, it sounds like he's expecting special snowflake treatment and offended at "being a low-level PC".

You say it's been some time since he played with you? Well, maybe he doesn't want to play with you any more. It looks like you've given him an "exit interview" and he's explained his reasons for leaving, and as long as the GM wants to run a low-level party, I don't see how it's likely to change.

And all of that is okay. People change. Don't overthink it. If he wants to go, he's gone and that's the end of it. So long as the rest of you are enjoying the game as-is - move on.

Pex
2015-09-23, 08:45 PM
From the player's perspective, he sees it as he can never do anything right and no NPC will ever like him. Nothing went his way. Any time he tries to engage the gameworld either it doesn't happen or he loses something - gold pieces, hit points, face. I would need to know metagame factors such as how the player and DM know each other, interacted in the past, etc. for a clearer analysis, but I can empathize with the player. Presuming no particular history with the DM I probably would have tried one more session to see if the situation improves. If there was a history, I'd quit, and have done so.

Broken Crown
2015-09-23, 09:10 PM
-The bar owner had a pet chicken, which looked at him funny.

The rest of it I could let pass, but this? When the chickens have it in for you, it's time to walk.

I would guess that this has little to do with the game itself, and that there was something else going on in the player's life to cause this amount of anxiety and frustration. I've seen it happen with a few of the people I game with: They're having a bad time, and just want to have some fun gaming, to get their mind off their problems, but things don't work out for them in game the way they'd hoped, and they get set off by the tiniest little thing.

If this is the case, it's unfortunate that the player decided to leave on such a note of finality. It will make it awkward for him to come back if he changes his mind.

Of course, I could be completely wrong. Maybe the player just took a dislike to the DM. Or maybe he's genuinely that sensitive. In either of those cases, him leaving might be better for the game.

Pyron
2015-09-23, 10:18 PM
Have you had this situation happen before? Are we horribly off base in our gaming group?

I have seen things like this before. As an outsider, I can't determine if the player's complaints are not or if there are other issues in the player's life that's piled on top of this. However, if it's his perception that the DM is targeting him, and that perception needs to be taken into consideration.

If you are still on speaking terms with the player, then I would encourage that give him time to cool his heels and see if he's willing to open up. Don't try to convince him to come back, but see if his stance has changed.

Fri
2015-09-24, 04:22 AM
Since you ask, I have my experience on player ragequitting as well, though this is for PbP and the player is just a random guy, not my friend.


Random people you game with online can have the weirdest misconceptions and/or tantrum, and sometimes it's not entirely their fault.

Like one time I was dming a pbp MnM game. One of the character got sneak-sniped by what's supposed to be a recurring sniper villain, and got completely downed in one hit, in their first outing. I actually kinda meant this to happen (didn't plan the specific thing to happen, but I do plan that a strong sniper villain will shoot at one of the player characters randomly, and this sniper guy is supposed to be quite strong since he's supposed to be a recurring villain. To be fair, he could've dodged it if he used a hero point, but he just squandered his hero point to attack some "bait" villains. But to keep things short, the villain rolled a critical, and he got downed in one hit.

This is an MnM game, and by default, it's not lethal. If you get downed, you're not dead. You'll be back up and fighting fully in the next session. But for some reason this player got angry (I think? I don't remember the exact emotional response), and he just deleted his character sheet and never reply anymore. Yes, he didn't simply resign from the game, or not posting anymore, he deleted his character sheet.

That's really the strangest thing I ever had with playing with random people online.

the_david
2015-09-24, 05:22 AM
-He asked an NPC to gamble with him, the NPC declined.

-He sat down next to an NPC sitting alone. The NPC politely asked him to leave. Same thing happened to 2 other PC's when they did the same thing.

The DM seems to say no a lot. Imagine seeing this in a movie. It would be a terrible movie, wouldn't it? That's because no doesn't add anything. The player is expecting action, and the DM is directly blocking that with his no. The NPC who's sitting alone could mention she's waiting for her friend who's unusally late. The not-gambler could have played a game, it just takes a gambling check. Who knows, maybe he has half of a treasure map he's willing to give up as a bet. The possibilities are endless.
The weird looks for no apparent reason were just weird. (Unless the guy played a special snowflake, then he had them coming.)

Or in other words, the key to good DMing is saying yes, and being flexible.

Ninja_Prawn
2015-09-24, 05:31 AM
I would guess that this has little to do with the game itself, and that there was something else going on in the player's life to cause this amount of anxiety and frustration.

I came to the same conclusion. The complaints listed by the OP are vanishingly minor, and it's clear that none of the other players noticed a problem.

If they're going to blow up like this at every little thing, you're probably better off without them.

Storm_Of_Snow
2015-09-24, 06:35 AM
To the OP: you only say so in two (minor) cases, but did the rest of the group receive the same kind of treatment from the DM (both in that session and in past sessions)? If not, he may have had a point.

Otherwise, yes, it sounds like he's got other issues in his life. It might be worth accepting he's gone from the group for now, and getting him in a more social surrounding to try and help him out.

Garimeth
2015-09-24, 08:47 AM
Sounds like unnecessary drama, and Sweet Brown will be the first to tell you:

AIN'T NOBODY GOT TIME FOR THAT.

GungHo
2015-09-24, 10:10 AM
Sometimes it's better to just let people go play single player games.

Honest Tiefling
2015-09-24, 12:44 PM
Did the PC have a high charisma? I didn't handle the situation well, but I did once get frustrated when I was in a party of people who could optimize better then me, so I had invested in charisma to be useful. Lo and behold, the skills didn't...Really get taken into account. I should have handled it differently, but boy did I get pissed off.

If this is a newer player, I could see the same issue perhaps being at play. The character is weaker in certain aspects to do this thing. This thing is not showing any signs of happening. Was this a warranted reaction? No, I would still say overreaction. But I could see how that might frustrate a newer player.

Quertus
2015-09-24, 02:32 PM
It's already been said, but

This is a tale of a lot of actions failing - not what most people are looking for from most games. (did the character take any actions that actually succeeded? Did anyone take any actions that succeeded? Or did everyone just take a lot of actions that failed?)
The DM may have misinterpreted one or more rules NOT in the player's favor (does the DM often mess up rules? Did the DM mess up any other rules that session? If so, was it to the player's benefit or detriment?).
Potential DM cheating (Were the rolls for the orc that shot him for 1/2 his HP in damage made openly? Were all rolls made openly? OP only commented on one or two rolls being made openly)
Verbal abuse (did NPCs randomly cuss at other players' characters?)
Random abuse (did anyone else have gold stolen (was anyone else dumb enough to leave gold unattended?)? Did anyone or anything else look at the other characters funny? Was anyone else trying as hard as this player to be involved in the game?)
Potential violation of expectations (has this player played in other games, where perhaps knife-between-fingers contests were a dex check or some other check where level wasn't likely to be a big factor? Was his character good enough at dex or some other reasonable check that he thought he at least had a chance? Were there any NPCs other than "shooty Orc" who seemed to be having trouble, then suddenly had a burst of skill against any other PCs?)


From 1 and 2 above, one can only deduce that we have either

a DM who isn't good at letting players succeed :(
a DM who was (consciously or nor) targeting the player
an incomplete picture


Most likely, the DM has a problem saying yes, or presenting a world where he can say yes.Sure, the NPC may have let you sit down if you had max ranks in Chr and diplomacy, and *asked* to sit down first, but, from the player black-box perspective, it seemed impossible. Since everyone enjoyed him, it sounds like you have a good player, trying really hard to interact with the world. Most likely, this player has problems with hearing no over and over. Putting these two together is not a good match. You probably can't change the player, so, if you can't change the DM, the player was right to leave. Again, still just guessing from what information I have, but the player probably wasn't right to feel singled out.

Now, if the DM wants to say "no" a lot, and not have players rage-quit because of it, I suggest a different system.

mephnick
2015-09-24, 03:44 PM
The DM seems to say no a lot.

This is probably it, although it was an overreaction. I can't say much about the rules faux-pas because I don't know how consistent they are.

I will say that we often see complaints on here about players doing something detrimental to the game and justifying it with "But, that's what my character would do!". Well, it goes both ways. The DM can't just sit there and say "That's not what the NPC would do!", because that's a horrible justification for denying the characters a fun moment. Obviously you have to say no to stupid ideas some times, but would an NPC gambling or talking to the character break the game? Would it destroy the central concept of the NPC? Probably not, so who cares?

D+1
2015-09-24, 09:16 PM
Or in other words, the key to good DMing is saying yes, and being flexible.
The key to being a good player is ACCEPTING "no" for an answer and being just as flexible.

If the OP's portrayal of events is accurate there was nothing happening that should have brought any decent player anywhere near ragequit territory. It's therefore either... just a problem with that individual player's mindset in general and it's a good thing it came out in the first game, OR the player in question actually does have other things going on and for whatever reason saw persecution where none was intended nor SHOULD have been taken.

Jay R
2015-09-24, 09:25 PM
Either:
The player is right, and the DM is being unfair t him, or
The DM is being fair, and the player is being unfair to the DM, or
Something else is going on that has nothing to do with the game.

I have a theory about which of the three it is, but the theory doesn't matter, because in all three cases, the correct solution is for the player to leave the game.

Wish him well, and have a fun game.

Pex
2015-09-25, 11:50 AM
The key to being a good player is ACCEPTING "no" for an answer and being just as flexible.

If the OP's portrayal of events is accurate there was nothing happening that should have brought any decent player anywhere near ragequit territory. It's therefore either... just a problem with that individual player's mindset in general and it's a good thing it came out in the first game, OR the player in question actually does have other things going on and for whatever reason saw persecution where none was intended nor SHOULD have been taken.

There is a difference between a player accepting "no" for an answer and a DM who always gives "no" as an answer.

b4ndito
2015-09-25, 01:00 PM
I've been in that guy's shoes. Sometimes it's hard to recognize you're paranoid... And then the DM decides to allow a hydra a separate will save for every head when you're the illusionist wizard.

You should implore him to come back with a clean slate, but make it clear the dm is going to treat him just the same as everyone. Sometimes it's natural for a dm to over-correct in those situations

Studoku
2015-09-25, 02:28 PM
Did you say goodbye and advise him to not let the door hit him in the ass on the way out?

Tiktik Ironclaw
2015-09-25, 05:19 PM
Why would you be angry when a goblin that you just skewered spits profanity at you? What, are you expecting thanks and congratulations? There's a trope for this, and it makes any dying character just a tad cooler! Now that I've over-analyzed that tiny bit of whining, allow me to say this:

The name of the "knife-between-fingers" game is Five Finger Fillet, and Bishop is the master.

Templarkommando
2015-09-26, 02:18 AM
I don't know if I've ever been in this place, but I have come away from a session miffed before. Here's what generally sets me off.

- Mechanics don't work the way that they are supposed to work in the book.

- Mechanics that were house ruled in an earlier session due to my previous objection now work in yet another way.

- My absolutely foolproof plan to circumvent the DM's plot fails for no other reason than it is the DM's plot.

- Not only does the dungeon yield no loot whatsoever, this happens on multiple occasions

- Other players get deals that I don't for an inexplicable reason (Gauntlets of Ogrepower cost 10 k for player 1, but 16 k for another player at the exact same time in the exact same place).

- I encounter a monster that I could not conceivably best or run away from given ideal rolls.

Usually I'm okay if just one or two of these happens, but if more than that happens in the same session I'm usually not content. I've never just stood up and walked out of a session though.

Mr Beer
2015-09-26, 04:17 AM
Person doesn't enjoy a game, so they decide to stop playing. Sounds like the system works.

Mrs Kat
2015-09-26, 10:09 AM
I've been the GM in a situation like the original post.

My player was suffering from an anxiety disorder, and believed I was persecuting him.
He gave a twenty-minute tirade about how awful I was and how my game was pointless and then stormed out.

I was sympathetic to his problems, but even if he genuinely believed I was persecuting him, that's no excuse for being a jerk.

We voted to not invite him back, and invited the guy on the top of our waiting list to come take his spot the next week.

Velaryon
2015-09-28, 10:22 PM
I'm of the belief, based on the OP and the following discussion, that it's player overreaction to unnecessarily restrictive DMing. If everything I tried resulted in the DM saying no, and my character got his butt disproportionately kicked to boot, I'd be strongly inclined not to come back for another session too. Yes, the hits to his character were most likely just bad luck, but piled on top of everything else it makes for not a very fun session.

That said, ragequitting like that is DEFINITELY a severe overreaction. Either the player has some emotional problems (a real possibility, even if it's not severe enough to be a disorder or anything), or there were other things in his life adding stress and frustration, and this game was just the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back. How well you know and how much you like this player should decide whether it's worth talking to him sometime to see what the deal is.

I've had a problem player in the past, who ragequit not one but two of my campaigns for frankly stupid reasons, and in both cases the atmosphere at the table improved noticeably after he left. So much so, in fact, that after the second one I pretty much just let the player go and made no further attempt to keep close contact with him. Sometimes it's better to just let them walk so that everyone else can go on having a good time.

ArcanaFire
2015-09-29, 03:17 AM
- My absolutely foolproof plan to circumvent the DM's plot fails for no other reason than it is the DM's plot.

Why would you try to circumvent the plot? What would the story be, then? I get not wanting to be railroaded, but intentionally trying to circumvent the story seems counterproductive to me.

I'm imagining if the DM just let it happen. "Alright, your plan works, no more trouble, looks like the campaign's over."

Raimun
2015-09-29, 05:04 AM
-The bar owner had a pet chicken, which looked at him funny.



Yeah. I think it's pretty clear what went wrong.

Seriously, though, this case sounds a bit weird without more context. Sure, I know some people are a bit more sensitive than others but none of the above sounds that horrible (when it happens to a fictional character you merely play, mind you), even if put together in a single session. Sure, it's no fun if you have too many setbacks but I think that was kind of an unreasonable reaction. That is, unless there's something that I don't know.

By the way, the orc didn't have a ranged attack of opportunity with a small cannon, right? I thought he just moved so that he was the closest to the orc and when it was the orc's turn, the orc shot him?

Geddy2112
2015-09-30, 03:21 PM
First, to clarify:

The goblin should not have gotten an AoO, it was a rule flub that we all messed up and nobody challenges. His character took 4 nonlethal damage from it, and it had no meaningful impact on the game. We sometimes get other rules wrong, but unless something major happens(like a PC could die) the ruling on the field generally stands.

The orc did not get an AoO, he shot the PC on his next turn. The PC was the closest target, so the orc shot at him.

The rolls were made secretly, so it is possible that the DM fudged the numbers.

His character killed at least 4 of the 8 goblins singlehandedly, and other party members suffered far more damage.

I should have been clearer about asking an NPC to gamble. He showed the NPC a gold and asked "I have a game called stabby, its a gold to play, winner take all."(paraphrased) The NPC asked to know the rules and the pc said "Where is the fun in that? One gold" At this point, the NPC politely declined, but was otherwise open to talking to the player.

The check to grab the gold he set down was made openly by the DM.

The NPC sitting alone had told 2 other party members to leave when they sat down next to him, before he received the exact same result.

We were traveling with a couple of these NPC's before, including the NPC who gave us all dirty looks. We were explained that this NPC had been doing this to all of us for weeks.

The chicken was pretty clearly intelligent, or at least trained. As if an animal companion or familiar.

Other players did not exactly have the best of interactions with the NPC's either. The paladin offered to buy the drinks for a very loud and boisterous trio, ended up losing three gold to their tab.
The Wyvern in the party witnessed a bard telling a story(including images) of how he once traveled with a small army and they fought a group of Wyverns. This included graphic and brutal depictions of Wyverns being killed.


Both the DM and myself expressed empathy for having a session where things don't go your way. We have both been there before, be it by fate, bad DM, choice, or bad rolls. We have been there, and it happens. The DM explained to him he was using stock NPC's of random levels, and the ones he chose/the way he interacted with them was just the way it was. Our DM is generally pretty good about setting up interactions for the players that fit their character, but being the first session he just threw in some stock NPC's, old characters from various players, etc.

To my knowledge, nothing is negative in the player's life. He seems pretty normal for a 20something person with a decent job, car, apartment, etc.

The DM and the player have disagreed on things before, but it has always been a very civil discourse. My DM is a bit lax about table talk, the player is very strict about it when he DM's. The DM sees the forest, this player sees the trees. Differences in opinion that they would get a bit heated in debating, but I don't think it ever came to ad homonyms or anything like that.

The player who ragequit continued to chew the DM out for a while, then a couple days ago apologized and asked to join back. However, one of our group had a friend interested in joining our game, so we signed him on the same night the old player ragequit. The old PC was not there when we woke up, and the new guy showed up shortly after. New player had no trouble with our group or DM-the session had no combat and a mix of NPC's: some having good days, some having bad days, some jerks, some really nice people. Everything went great and everyone went home happy. Since we have a full table and the DM was less than thrilled with his attitude, he was not allowed to join back.

Aetol
2015-09-30, 03:56 PM
So did you let him join back ?

The Glyphstone
2015-09-30, 04:41 PM
Since we have a full table and the DM was less than thrilled with his attitude, he was not allowed to join back.

Apparently not.

Arbane
2015-10-01, 12:19 AM
Why would you try to circumvent the plot? What would the story be, then? I get not wanting to be railroaded, but intentionally trying to circumvent the story seems counterproductive to me.

I'm imagining if the DM just let it happen. "Alright, your plan works, no more trouble, looks like the campaign's over."

Sometimes, because the plot requires the players to get walked over by a foe they could easily beat if they weren't in a cutscene, or because it requires them to not see obvious betrayal coming.

goto124
2015-10-01, 12:23 AM
If that's the case, the GM is the problem.

If the player trusts the GM to not behave in such a railroady manner, the player shouldn't 'circumvent the plot'.

If there's a plot, it should be one the players and GM have already agreed to follow ('alright, you're Good heros looking to save the princess. It doesn't matter how you do it, but don't drop the princess into a volcano or burn down an orphanage').

There's the possibility of having a more sandboxy style of gameplay, where there's no plot anyway, just a setting with NPCs and situations the players can react to however they wish (with limits, but lesser than in 'plots'). Then there's no plot to 'circumvent', the players create the plot with the help of the GM via playing it out.

Solaris
2015-10-01, 10:41 AM
Sometimes, because the plot requires the players to get walked over by a foe they could easily beat if they weren't in a cutscene, or because it requires them to not see obvious betrayal coming.

I agree with goto124. That's not good writing, and if the players aren't willing to play along there's really no excuse for trying to force them.

Just look at how many bad DMing stories involve 'cutscenes', railroading, and similar sacrifices of player agency on the unholy altar of the plot.