PC Becoming a Hindrance

[Kesnit]

I am running a 3.5 adaptation of World’s Largest Dungeon.


E: Halfling Cloistered Cleric / Divine Oracle. Focuses on buffing and debuffing, as well as healing the party. With the change to Cloistered Cleric, she is also the one most likely to make a Knowledge check.
S: Spirit-Scourged Hellbred Binder 1/Warlock 8 (going into Hellfire Warlock next level). The PC is new, as S has a tendency to get her PCs killed. (She is also my wife.)
P: Half-Orc Fighter 4/Barbarian 5. Long-time player, but is not very familiar with the rules. All she wants to do is “Krunkette SMASH!” (She is my mother-in-law.)
B: Race and class are from a 3rd party book that I don’t have. (He showed me both prior to making the PC and I approved them.) The class is called Ninja, but isn’t the one from CAdv. Instead, it’s a Rogue with a little bit of spellcasting and no armor prof. (He gets WIS-to-AC like a Monk.)

I am leveling the party as they progress through the dungeon, rather than giving them XP. I also houseruled a sled in the entrance area that allows dead or non-organic items (but not living or undead) to pass through. This allows the party to sell treasure and get stuff they want.

For a while, I was allowing the party all the treasure that the dungeon provides, until I realized the party was way over WBL. After that, I started reducing (though not eliminating) the drops. Of course, all items dropped in the dungeon that the party wanted to keep, they could keep.

About 3 sessions ago, S’s character (then a Totemist/Unarmed Swordsage) died and we built her Warlock. Not knowing how much treasure the party had, I set her wealth to 40,000. (I found out later that that is only 4000 higher than WBL for LVL 9.) I also decided to adjust P’s gear, since I had not done that in a while.

Meanwhile, the party entered a new area and leveled to 9. The area they are in is for level 7-9, and the checks to find and disarm traps and open locks is getting higher. (25 is low. 30 is normal.) B has points in Open Lock, Search, and Disable Device, but not enough to consistently make the DC 30s he is finding. Instead, he has been putting points into Skill Tricks. (Please note, I don’t mind skill tricks. However, he’s buying skill tricks at the expense of skills needed for the dungeon.) Since I was already encouraging E to switch from regular Cleric to Cloistered Cleric, I gave B the option to rebuild as well. I also limited both of them to 40,000 gold to equip their new PCs. And that’s where the “fun” began.

E had no problem with switching PCs. She ended up with a much lower AC, but told me after game she’s going to invest in some light armor and a shield. B did not even consider rebuilding (even though he knows he’s failing skill checks). In addition, he wanted to use a lot of homebrew stuff, such as some new skill tricks, a weapon crystal was the horribly underpriced, and a feat that allows using skill tricks 2/encounter (and 3/encounter at LVL 11). I flatly put my foot down and said “no homebrew,” which caused him to start pouting and arguing that he “tried to pick the most balanced things.” (He got everything from D&D Wiki.)

Then he had to redo his gear, which led to another near-fit. He uses a +1 Deadly Precision spear (18,000) and has 4 weapon crystals (3000 each). Do the math, and his weapon and crystals alone are 30,000 of his 40,000. He did not want to give up anything that he had, even though he had twice the wealth of anyone else (even before I set a limit of 40,000). That’s also when I realized that he had been keeping things from party loot, but was still taking his full allowance of gold from selling treasure (instead of counting the stuff he kept against his total). Turns out he had kept a little over 13,000 gold of gear, rather than counting that against his share of treasure. He tried to argue that “Thieves get more gold because they are, well, thieves.” I told him that one, he isn’t a “thief,” he’s a ninja, and two, if he is going to say he is stealing from the party, I am going to start giving the other PCs checks to catch him stealing. He answered that he isn’t stealing from the party, but that he needs more gold because his class requires more expensive gear. (He has no armor proficiently and wears basic clothes. He has standard AC boosting gear and a standard weapon. He never had a stat booster because he never thought to get one.)

Thankfully, E is a trained moderator and managed to talk B through picking the gear he wanted to keep (which did include the spear, but not the weapon crystals). We also discovered that he’d been using some of his gear wrong. (A Vest of Escape gives bonuses to Open Lock and Escape Artist. It does not give Freedom of Movement.) Granted, these are things I should have known, but had not looked up.

And after all that, he still can’t make skill checks. And that is why he is becoming a hindrance. The party needs someone who can find and disable traps, but B is making no effort in that area. S has been encouraging me to build a Goblin Rogue, pretend the Goblin is part of the dungeon, and give the character sheet to the players to run, with the understanding that the Goblin will run away from every combat and come back once combat is over. I don’t really want to do that as I don’t want to step on B’s toes, but I also don’t think it’s fair that the rest of the party is suffering because B’s PC is really bad at one of his roles.

Any advice (other than "kick B out.")

[Red Fel]

Any advice (other than "kick B out.")

Well, to any problem, there are two solutions.

Out-of-game problems merit out-of-game solutions. In this case, you had that - there was an intervention when a player was discovered to have a character stealing from party loot. The player has been spoken to and the concern has been addressed. Hopefully, that's the end of that. If it isn't, a gentle "Don't be that guy," reminder will hopefully be sufficient. (If not, that's why "kick B out" is an option.)

In-game problems merit in-game solutions. In this case, you have two in-game problems. First, party member stealing from the party. As mentioned above, that has hopefully been addressed. Second, character failing to pull his weight in the party. That's for an in-game solution. If I worked at a company and one of my employees wasn't working, I'd call him on it, and if he messed up repeatedly, I'd let him go. Same thing in a party of PCs; if one character isn't contributing to the party's success, the other characters would reasonably tell him to start keeping up, or let him go.

The thing to remember is that letting the character go isn't kicking the player out. It's saying "This particular character has poisoned the well; we're done with him. Go roll a new character and bring him along."

And it's not unreasonable, if the other players agree. If they feel that his character really isn't keeping up, it's not unreasonable for the other PCs to say, "Look, chief, it's not us, it's you. You're not adding to our success. Best of luck, now scram."

[denthor]

You have what is loving referenced as a power gamer or a min/max person.

E is running a thief even if it is called something else. His characters problem that his class requires more gold his choice to run that build. Wants the advantages but please remember many people do not get the gold they need to fund there needs.

This why deals exist in D&D is this a Lawful or chaotic character have fun

I call forth Red Fell for more examples of what I type

[Gildedragon]

Your problem isn't the player per se but a lack of skill-monkey-ing
I have two options:
1) Split the job:
1a)Have a ring of trapfinding find its way into the loot pile
1b) have Anima Mage advance warlock invocations (or an Eldritch Knight of the Sacred Seal: medium BAB, warlock progression, tweak the abilities and requirements a bit) there are several vestiges that can have them take over the trapfinding role.
1c)Allow the cleric to cast from Int? The boost in skillpoints would let them invest into getting some search and disable device and open lock; domain draughts kobold domain are helpful

2)Condense skills: open lock and disable device, for example (or at least have them give synergy bonus to one another)

But let Mr ninja play their style... And if he dies he could always come back as a ghost (which makes them a good scout

[nedz]

I call forth Red Fell for more examples of what I type

Amusing Ninja.

Talking of which I'd let the party alone. They have to learn or take the consequences, you are not there to nanny them. Now you could make the traps have more amusing consequences than take d% damage (or whatever) but still: the players own their characters and have to take the consequences of their actions.

[Kesnit]

In-game problems merit in-game solutions. In this case, you have two in-game problems. First, party member stealing from the party. As mentioned above, that has hopefully been addressed. Second, character failing to pull his weight in the party. That's for an in-game solution. If I worked at a company and one of my employees wasn't working, I'd call him on it, and if he messed up repeatedly, I'd let him go. Same thing in a party of PCs; if one character isn't contributing to the party's success, the other characters would reasonably tell him to start keeping up, or let him go.

He's been told that he needs to be able to make the skill checks. When he failed (and the party fell into a nasty trap), he stopped trying to find traps and pushed P's FGT/BARB into leading the party down the hallways. (That was 2 game sessions ago.)


The thing to remember is that letting the character go isn't kicking the player out. It's saying "This particular character has poisoned the well; we're done with him. Go roll a new character and bring him along."

B was offered the chance to reroll, but refused to take it. When he has rebuilt his characters, he always plays some variant of Rogue/SORC.


And it's not unreasonable, if the other players agree.

S is fed up with B and would love to kick him out. (She almost kicked him out* last game session when he whined about losing his stuff.) P isn't going to push the issue, but from comments she has made, would not be upset if he was gone. E is the only one giving him the benefit of the doubt, and I suspect that's because she is the newest member of the group and has not been around for most of B's shinanigans.

*We play at my in-law's house.



You have what is loving referenced as a power gamer or a min/max person.

I'm not sure that's the best way to describe B. (If anyone is a power-gamer, it's me.) B is actually UNDERpowered.


His characters problem that his class requires more gold his choice to run that build.

His class needs no more gold than anyone else's, especially compared to P's Barbarian. He THINKS he needs more gold, but he really doesn't.


Wants the advantages but please remember many people do not get the gold they need to fund there needs wants.

I know. S has a long list of things she wants for her Warlock, but couldn't afford.


Your problem isn't the player per se but a lack of skill-monkey-ing
I have two options:
1) Split the job:
1a)Have a ring of trapfinding find its way into the loot pile

I can do that. It's a better idea than a Goblin Rogue.


1b) have Anima Mage advance warlock invocations (or an Eldritch Knight of the Sacred Seal: medium BAB, warlock progression, tweak the abilities and requirements a bit) there are several vestiges that can have them take over the trapfinding role.

S only has a level of Binder for Hellfire Warlock. I don't think she'd be too keen on learning the soulbinding mechanic.


1c)Allow the cleric to cast from Int? The boost in skillpoints would let them invest into getting some search and disable device and open lock; domain draughts kobold domain are helpful

She already boosted INT to become the Knowledge expert. Her domains are set.


2)Condense skills: open lock and disable device, for example (or at least have them give synergy bonus to one another)

I don't want to baby B, which is what doing this would be.


But let Mr ninja play their style... And if he dies he could always come back as a ghost (which makes them a good scout

If he dies, he'll rebuild the same thing. He's done it before.


Talking of which I'd let the party alone. They have to learn or take the consequences, you are not there to nanny them. Now you could make the traps have more amusing consequences than take d% damage (or whatever) but still: the players own their characters and have to take the consequences of their actions.

They know the problem that B's lack of competence is causing. I feel bad punishing the other players because B refuses to make the changes necessary to pull his PCs weight. But no one can force B to make the changes necessary. I gave him the chance, but he refused to take it.

[LTwerewolf]

Create some traps that penalize them in more interesting ways. Oops, you just triggered a trap that summons 2d4 rust monsters.

[Triskavanski]

You could always try some psychological restructuring methods.

[Kesnit]

Create some traps that penalize them in more interesting ways. Oops, you just triggered a trap that summons 2d4 rust monsters.

:smallbiggrin: Sadly, the person who would suffer the most is P, as she has both metal armor and a metal weapon.


You could always try some psychological restructuring methods.

Huh?

[LTwerewolf]

There are equivalents to rust monsters for wood and other material bases. Have to be equal opportunity about it. If you throw several different types in one fight, it not only gets the point across, but also forces some teamwork. The folks with metal armor/weapons won't be killing the rust monsters, but they can help protect against the others.

[Triskavanski]

Basically, various kinds of brainwashing and the like :3

[ATHATH]

You have what is loving referenced as a power gamer or a min/max person.

E is running a thief even if it is called something else. His characters problem that his class requires more gold his choice to run that build. Wants the advantages but please remember many people do not get the gold they need to fund there needs.

This why deals exist in D&D is this a Lawful or chaotic character have fun

I call forth Red Fell for more examples of what I type
B is not a powergamer or a min/maxer. He might be a munchkin (he has been cheating a little bit), but his character is woefully ineffective and likely not optimized.

Even if B's class isn't Thief or Rogue, he can still be a thief. Sure, it's an incredibly [expletive] move on his part, but there's nothing inherently wrong with being something other than what your class's name says you are.

I can't even tell what your third paragraph is about. From what I can tell, it seems to be implying that a deal of some sort should be involved.

You spelled Red Fel's name wrong and didn't perform his summoning ritual properly.

[AnachroNinja]

I feel like at least some small part of the problem here is the inherent expectation that any class with trap finding in it necessitates it's player being the trap monkey. There are dozens of more effective and safer options for finding traps. Why exactly is it hits responsibility solely for finding them? It seems obvious the player does not want to invest in trap finding or be the trap finder. Unless there was a social contract made that hasn't been explained, he is under no obligation to fill that role just because he likes to play sneak attacking ninjas.

To me the question is, is he active in combat and roleplay (even if somewhat ineffectively)? If so, he's pulling his weight in game from a character perspective. The other issues are issues true, but his lack of desire to go hunting for deadly traps to preserve the skins of everyone what isn't really an issue, it's a choice. And a reasonable one.

[Anlashok]

Does anyone think the DM in this scenario is kind of a ****? Trying to push a character into rebuilding because the character doesn't have the skills the DM thinks he should have and then declaring the character bad and talking about kicking the player out of the group because of it?

I'd probably walk away from the table if a DM pulled something like that on me.

Doesn't really make up for 'B' being a ****, but this is the kind of story I'd expect to see from his perspective in a DM horror stories thread.

[denthor]

E is not a powergamer or a min/maxer. He might be a munchkin (he has been cheating a little bit), but his character is woefully ineffective and likely not optimized.

Even if E's class isn't Thief or Rogue, he can still be a thief. Sure, it's an incredibly [expletive] move on his part, but there's nothing inherently wrong with being something other than what your class's name says you are.

I can't even tell what your third paragraph is about. From what I can tell, it seems to be implying that a deal of some sort should be involved.

You spelled Red Fel's name wrong and didn't perform his summoning ritual properly.


Red fel is evil he was posting while I was if you look at the thread he started one minute before I did so he beat my summoning call even though I hit submit before he did


3rd paragraph : an imp or a quasit or something stronger could make him an offer.

[Kesnit]

I feel like at least some small part of the problem here is the inherent expectation that any class with trap finding in it necessitates it's player being the trap monkey.

I wasn't too clear. It is his choice. In a previous campaign I ran with the group, I had to add traps to dungeons because he insisted on looking for them.


It seems obvious the player does not want to invest in trap finding or be the trap finder.

That's just it - he DOES want to be the trap finder.


To me the question is, is he active in combat and roleplay (even if somewhat ineffectively)?

Combat, yes. He does damage. RP - no. His character sheet says True Neutral, but he plays Evil. His only concern is finding the next combat, regardless of what the rest of the party wants.


Does anyone think the DM in this scenario is kind of a ****? Trying to push a character into rebuilding because the character doesn't have the skills the DM thinks he should have and then declaring the character bad and talking about kicking the player out of the group because of it?

1) The player wants to be a trapfinder. That isn't a role I pushed on him. He's just really bad at it.
2) I have a long (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?444326-More-Player-Problems&p=19852365#post19852365) history (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?440179-Troublesome-Player&p=19787395#post19787395) of problems (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19531874&postcount=17) with him (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?412002-%283-5%29-Problems-With-the-Party&p=19172402#post19172402). Also, there are other issues unrelated to his playing that are pushing me towards kicking him.

[AnimeTheCat]

Does anyone think the DM in this scenario is kind of a ****? Trying to push a character into rebuilding because the character doesn't have the skills the DM thinks he should have and then declaring the character bad and talking about kicking the player out of the group because of it?

I'd probably walk away from the table if a DM pulled something like that on me.

Doesn't really make up for 'B' being a ****, but this is the kind of story I'd expect to see from his perspective in a DM horror stories thread.

Uhm... I think you may have missed the post where it showed the majority of the party was also fed up with him... I don't think the DM is pushing anyone. If you want to go in to a dungeon and then sit on your hands because all the doors are locked then walk out because the DM tried to urge you to take the skills necessary for a standard skill monkey... that's your perogative, but I don't see how the DM is being a ****.... He's tried to do what DMS should, guide along a path for the whole party to have fun, not just one person.

The point of DnD is to have fun but a roguish type that can't effectively open locks or disable traps doesn't sound fun at all. Especially in the world's biggest dungeon.

[Gildedragon]

S only has a level of Binder for Hellfire Warlock. I don't think she'd be too keen on learning the soulbinding mechanic.
Fairnuff

She already boosted INT to become the Knowledge expert. Her domains are set. then let her use Int for spellcasting rather than Wis. As to domain changing: domain draughts and the domain-changing spell are to let her temporarily access another domain.


I don't want to baby B, which is what doing this would be.
Perhaps, but the skill system IS bloated, and condensing it would also be good if you want to allow other players to pick up the slack.


If he dies, he'll rebuild the same thing. He's done it before.
I'm saying he keeps the character he's got, but loses 1 level and gains 1 level in the ghost template class. Make him into a better scout.

[Nightcanon]

Uhm... I think you may have missed the post where it showed the majority of the party was also fed up with him... I don't think the DM is pushing anyone. If you want to go in to a dungeon and then sit on your hands because all the doors are locked then walk out because the DM tried to urge you to take the skills necessary for a standard skill monkey... that's your perogative, but I don't see how the DM is being a ****.... He's tried to do what DMS should, guide along a path for the whole party to have fun, not just one person.

The point of DnD is to have fun but a roguish type that can't effectively open locks or disable traps doesn't sound fun at all. Especially in the world's biggest dungeon.

Finding and disabling traps isn't just the rogue's job, though. Spellcasters in particular can take on this role (indeed, in other circumstances a player who does want to play a trap-monkey rogue might complain that the wizard crafting a wand of knock is stealing his thunder). Casters get new spells every day, a rogue type gets a handful of skill points each level. Why should one rather than the other invest in opening doors? If B's character has access to magic, why not nudge them towards using this to enhance their trapfinding performance?

Edit to add: barbarians get trap sense, yet your mother in law is only interested in 'Krunkette SMASH!!!' and has multiclassed to fighter, presumably because it offers more goodies that help her do what she wants to do. You mention that your wife also plays: is B her annoying kid brother who is trying to get attention, and you are more tolerant of your wife and parents in-law not contributing to the solution to the trap-finding problem? There are plenty of ways for a level 9+ party to deal with traps and locks, other than making the party rogue be a locksmith and insisting on maxed out search/disable device/ open locks.

[Quertus]

I think I've played with a few players like this. They don't have a college education worth of gaming knowledge, and supplement what they know with what sounds cool. If you look closely, their abilities rarely do what they say they do. They probably cheat at dice. And, despite all this, their characters really aren't all that good.

"You had to cheat to be this bad?!"

I was a little confused by your post. B was stealing from the party, yet they were still above WBL? And then you magic nerfed them down? And called B out on his clever accounting, that no one had caught OOC, and likely lack the skills to catch IC? Did I read that right?

I'm not personally a fan of stealing from the party, but it is a valid play style. If I'm reading your posts right, while my character might be slightly miffed at B's character (if he ever found out IC, that is), I think I'd have more trouble with the way you handled things, personally.

Worse, that not only doesn't help B contribute, it makes it even harder for him to contribute.

So you need to look at this from the point of view of, "how do we help B contribute?". You already tried one thing, letting him rebuild his character. This predictably failed. Players like B don't really know the rules well enough for this to help, and, like B, often just make the same thing over and over again. Because cool.

But you already knew this.

Much like the rule that you should always drop (at least) 3 hints about anything you want the characters to realize, you should also not just hit a problem from a single vector, then throw up your hands and say that you tried.

You could suggest a few items to B to improve his capabilities. But what I think you should do is ask B what he wants his character's role in the party to be.

If he wants it to be to find traps, then point out how - as he knows - his character is not up to the challenge, and ask how he plans to fix that. If he doesn't have a response, then ask why he doesn't make certain changes to his character. But don't just stop at letting him rebuild his character, this time with very pointed suggestions as to changes that might help him achieve his goals. Continue with more suggestions, like certain items that he could prioritize purchasing. He likes homebrew - ask if he knows any homebrew that would get his skills up to acceptable levels. Etc. Have a conversation. Ask, listen, and advise. Emphasis on the listen. Because it's what most of us fail at.

But if he indicates, as he has by pushing P's character up front, that finding traps really isn't important to him (any more?) then let him do his thing. Suggest that the party purchase a bag of tricks, that ring that was mentioned up thread, something to animate the dead (there's a rod for that, right?), take leadership for a trapfinder, or otherwise deal with the problem. Or not. I mean, I have fun playing in parties with obvious, gaping holes in their capabilities - maybe y'all can, too.

But, when dealing with this kind of player,


But let Mr ninja play their style... And if he dies he could always come back as a ghost (which makes them a good scout

He wasn't all that useful before. If you take away his theft, his cheating, and his cheating, he probably doesn't have the toolkit to replace it with anything. So he'll be extremely not useful, unless you replace these losses somehow.

Letting him take the ghost of his old character as a cohort, and using said ghost to scout, is not a bad alternative. Of course, he has to die before that can work.

In all honesty, losing a player like B isn't the end of the world. But they're also kinda "low CR" compared to true problem players, and tend to produce lots of fun stories if you can find a way to keep them around.

[daremetoidareyo]

This is a funny situation.

Is this hindrance player immature and selfish, or a sadistic genius who graduated from online trolling to real life trolling? From the information given, I can interpret it both ways, and I got to tell ya, the latter way is funnier. So I'm going to brainstorm ways to deal with that guy.

So this dude makes it his goal to find ways to screw up what he sets out to do, but insists that is what he HAS to be the main guy to do? That's like a drunk insisting that he can drive, and you guys keep handing him keys and you let him wreck the car and he laughs his whole jaunty walk home.

If this guy who entered the game is coming from this perspective: I'm a violent niche protector, and despite stealing thousands of GP of player gold, ... I'LL STILL SUCK AT MY DESIRED ROLE. And then all of those guys will flip the heck out. But I'll stick to my guns, try to roll it out, but I'll just make more and more ludicrous demands, just to see what I can get away with.

It sounds like this player thinks that he can WIN the game of DND particularly in relationship to the rest of you by collecting enough power. Or he thinks someone else at the table is playing that way, and this is his protest. In either case, fundamentally, he understands the role of DM on a literally adversarial level and thus feels that petulance is a legitimate means of expression. You can play into that and have fun. But you have to let them win. All you have to do is allow them to sweat.

The way you DM to that guy is to give them rope to hang themselves. If booting them isn't a real solution due to the momentum of certain types of friendship and allegiance forming, then you need to develop a means of pacification.

First suggestion One option is to start getting bigger and more epic with bigger loot drops and higher stakes and explosions in the background as your teams rip the face off of the gods due to tactical use of slippers of godzilla smashing. Because perhaps your player feels boxed in by the power constraints. So a solution is to give this guy bigger stats.

Basically, appease their reaction to perceived resource scarcity. Let all the PCs get real fat for a session or two. Make the enemies be formulaic and dumb, and let them get smashed to pieces despite having neat gear. Make the bad guys be afraid of the PCs. Let it be easy for a while. And then get mean. Out of Character, work with all the non problem players and let them know that you're trying something different. And then out of character in front of all players, including the problem player, announce that:
"I feel like I've been a slouch, so this time, I'm really going to try to kill the PCs. I'm not ****footing around, I'm coming at your necks for the next few sessions. You have..."

...and then you list each players amazing gear and how many charges they have left to them.

"expect to use every charge on every item and use them liberally, because I am throwing the meanest stuff I can imagine at you. And you better get your GP worth. I know for a fact that you have everything you need to squeek by, but it's really gonna go down." Then send tough monsters at them. And then when they win, reward them big again. The theory here is that you enter a cycle of give and take with the players. You have to make your oppositional role playful and engaging. Like a stupid commercial. And then, during a session, talk smack with the problem player, like you're singling them out for special attention, but fudge the roll when he attacks, and then, this is important, let him gloat right in your face. And you pretend to feel really embarrassed. And then you never tell anyone that you did that. ever.

Another option: If you suspect that the PC is just bored instead of afraid of being weak. Roll with their weirdness and paranoia, make it weird, but make the weird have rules.
Give the problem PC a curse or magic item where traps are literally attracted to him. When he's within 50 miles of a trap, they animate and come find him. He begins attracting small animated traps that he can command to go set up somewhere or act as scouts. Set up some weird pokemon catching charisma check + combat where he can collect traps to set loose as minions.

All animated traps can set themselves up instead of a full attack. They have a speed. Their attacks have X damage.
level 1: snare,
Level 2: net
level 3: ejector seat
Level 4: dart
level 5: envenomer (trap augment that applies a type of poison to the trap that it is attached to.
etc.

Give them an item that makes them a trapmaster, in the sense that he battles sentient traps that he is the master of. That should appease his boredom.

[HolyDraconus]

Not gonna lie, I would of killed his char sessions ago. I give my players a "prologue" to introduce them to the world they are in. After that, I stop pulling punches. What this char sounds like is that he thinks the entire campaign is a prologue. So kill him. Standard rez rules of loss of level. Eventually, it would come to the point that he CANT (due to too low of a level to have enough ranks, synergies or items to)find any traps and/or he stops making classes that should look for them. I taught two players the hard way on how to play a rogue, and surprise, everyone checks doors for traps now. Its like magic almost. Of course, I also threw Tucker's Kobolds at them at lvl 4. So..... yeah...party wipes are a thing. Party wipes that can be avoided due to the actions of one player are ALSO a thing. This is neither of those. Kill the character.

[nedz]

You could just stop putting traps in - they are obviously annoying you and just not working as a game device. They are a feature of the game which can get old.

[Florian]

@Kesnik:

How you stop meddling around with characters and all that? Constant rebuilding, constant reequipping, what´s all of that stuff for?

[Mystral]

I am running a 3.5 adaptation of World’s Largest Dungeon.


E: Halfling Cloistered Cleric / Divine Oracle. Focuses on buffing and debuffing, as well as healing the party. With the change to Cloistered Cleric, she is also the one most likely to make a Knowledge check.
S: Spirit-Scourged Hellbred Binder 1/Warlock 8 (going into Hellfire Warlock next level). The PC is new, as S has a tendency to get her PCs killed. (She is also my wife.)
P: Half-Orc Fighter 4/Barbarian 5. Long-time player, but is not very familiar with the rules. All she wants to do is “Krunkette SMASH!” (She is my mother-in-law.)
B: Race and class are from a 3rd party book that I don’t have. (He showed me both prior to making the PC and I approved them.) The class is called Ninja, but isn’t the one from CAdv. Instead, it’s a Rogue with a little bit of spellcasting and no armor prof. (He gets WIS-to-AC like a Monk.)

I am leveling the party as they progress through the dungeon, rather than giving them XP. I also houseruled a sled in the entrance area that allows dead or non-organic items (but not living or undead) to pass through. This allows the party to sell treasure and get stuff they want.

For a while, I was allowing the party all the treasure that the dungeon provides, until I realized the party was way over WBL. After that, I started reducing (though not eliminating) the drops. Of course, all items dropped in the dungeon that the party wanted to keep, they could keep.

About 3 sessions ago, S’s character (then a Totemist/Unarmed Swordsage) died and we built her Warlock. Not knowing how much treasure the party had, I set her wealth to 40,000. (I found out later that that is only 4000 higher than WBL for LVL 9.) I also decided to adjust P’s gear, since I had not done that in a while.

Meanwhile, the party entered a new area and leveled to 9. The area they are in is for level 7-9, and the checks to find and disarm traps and open locks is getting higher. (25 is low. 30 is normal.) B has points in Open Lock, Search, and Disable Device, but not enough to consistently make the DC 30s he is finding. Instead, he has been putting points into Skill Tricks. (Please note, I don’t mind skill tricks. However, he’s buying skill tricks at the expense of skills needed for the dungeon.) Since I was already encouraging E to switch from regular Cleric to Cloistered Cleric, I gave B the option to rebuild as well. I also limited both of them to 40,000 gold to equip their new PCs. And that’s where the “fun” began.

E had no problem with switching PCs. She ended up with a much lower AC, but told me after game she’s going to invest in some light armor and a shield. B did not even consider rebuilding (even though he knows he’s failing skill checks). In addition, he wanted to use a lot of homebrew stuff, such as some new skill tricks, a weapon crystal was the horribly underpriced, and a feat that allows using skill tricks 2/encounter (and 3/encounter at LVL 11). I flatly put my foot down and said “no homebrew,” which caused him to start pouting and arguing that he “tried to pick the most balanced things.” (He got everything from D&D Wiki.)

Then he had to redo his gear, which led to another near-fit. He uses a +1 Deadly Precision spear (18,000) and has 4 weapon crystals (3000 each). Do the math, and his weapon and crystals alone are 30,000 of his 40,000. He did not want to give up anything that he had, even though he had twice the wealth of anyone else (even before I set a limit of 40,000). That’s also when I realized that he had been keeping things from party loot, but was still taking his full allowance of gold from selling treasure (instead of counting the stuff he kept against his total). Turns out he had kept a little over 13,000 gold of gear, rather than counting that against his share of treasure. He tried to argue that “Thieves get more gold because they are, well, thieves.” I told him that one, he isn’t a “thief,” he’s a ninja, and two, if he is going to say he is stealing from the party, I am going to start giving the other PCs checks to catch him stealing. He answered that he isn’t stealing from the party, but that he needs more gold because his class requires more expensive gear. (He has no armor proficiently and wears basic clothes. He has standard AC boosting gear and a standard weapon. He never had a stat booster because he never thought to get one.)

Thankfully, E is a trained moderator and managed to talk B through picking the gear he wanted to keep (which did include the spear, but not the weapon crystals). We also discovered that he’d been using some of his gear wrong. (A Vest of Escape gives bonuses to Open Lock and Escape Artist. It does not give Freedom of Movement.) Granted, these are things I should have known, but had not looked up.

And after all that, he still can’t make skill checks. And that is why he is becoming a hindrance. The party needs someone who can find and disable traps, but B is making no effort in that area. S has been encouraging me to build a Goblin Rogue, pretend the Goblin is part of the dungeon, and give the character sheet to the players to run, with the understanding that the Goblin will run away from every combat and come back once combat is over. I don’t really want to do that as I don’t want to step on B’s toes, but I also don’t think it’s fair that the rest of the party is suffering because B’s PC is really bad at one of his roles.

Any advice (other than "kick B out.")

"B" is not your lock-pick bot. If he doesn't want to play the guy who disarms traps and opens locks (remember, he's a ninja), then your reaction should not be to kick him out. Furnish the party with a way to open locks and disable traps, or have them use work-arounds or take longer routes. It's your job as a DM to mold the dungeon to the PCs (while still offering a fun challenge), and not the job of the party to build to cater towards the module.

[torrasque666]

"B" is not your lock-pick bot. If he doesn't want to play the guy who disarms traps and opens locks (remember, he's a ninja), then your reaction should not be to kick him out. Furnish the party with a way to open locks and disable traps, or have them use work-arounds or take longer routes. It's your job as a DM to mold the dungeon to the PCs (while still offering a fun challenge), and not the job of the party to build to cater towards the module.
He's already mentioned that the guy wants to be the trapfinding skill monkey. Post 16. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20760523&postcount=16)

[Mystral]

He's already mentioned that the guy wants to be the trapfinding skill monkey. Post 16. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20760523&postcount=16)

So? Give him an item that boosts the relevant skill/s. Make it come out of his loot allowance.

Now, if he sells that item to boost his spear.. I got nothing.

[Mystral]

Alright, after reading the threads about the other problems.. I have to change my opinion.

Kick him out. I can't see any redeeming qualities.

[AnimeTheCat]

So, i'm not sure how you build characters with the PCs but here's how I do it aND I've been doing it this way for 14 years. Anytime I dm I always always always ask the player this specific question, "what do you want to be?" Now, typically that nets me an answer of "I wanna be a rogue" and anyone who's played DnD knows that's is not an appropriate answer to the question posed. So I rephrase with "no, not what class, what do you want to be? A master swordsman? An undead hunter? A masterful thief? WHAT do you want to be?" To which I usually get a much more in depth response along the lines of (for rogue sakes) "I want to be a stealthy assassin that stiles fear in to the heart of his enemies and makes them feel uneasy even in the relative safety of their own homes." That tells me, generally, what base class they will want, their primary skills, and the progression they will want to go down all the way to level 20. In the above mentioned case, you have a rogue to assassin (maybe, I know there are better PrCs) then back to rogue with a focus in making the most out of sneak attack and open lock. Those two are easy to stack. No problems there. So I sit down and map out a character plan, level 1 to level 20 and we talk about feats and race, etc. Usually through this dialogue we come up with a story for the character and this helps the player identify with the character they will be playing. This also gives you a chance to learn exactly what a player's intentions are as well as help guide them in a way that will benefit the party. This method has done me well thus far and had helped to build confidence in my players to the point that they come ready with a 1-20 build plan and loads of character concepts on their own. It helps the player get excited about that character and allows me a slight bit of DM fiat to coax the player in to putting points in beneficial skills or urging them away from skills that just downright make no sense (like concentration for a rogue that won't be going anywhere near spell casting not tomb of battle). If you haven't done it this way with 'B' might I recommend giving it a whirl? And it can be done any time, just as long as the player is interested. The idea is to provoke the imaginative juices and stimulate the mind, not force it in to a corner. If the player doesn't really want to play a trap finding and disablingmrogue, you now know and can adjust accordingly. Now, don't get me wrong, I've read the whole post, as well as the many others, and I know you've given lots of chances but I also know that tensions sometimes run high and make it a little harder to approach things creatively. I hope maybe this can provide a different view point than just "reroll his character" or "kick him".

[Kesnit]

Finding and disabling traps isn't just the rogue's job, though. Spellcasters in particular can take on this role (indeed, in other circumstances a player who does want to play a trap-monkey rogue might complain that the wizard crafting a wand of knock is stealing his thunder).

During games where B hasn't been able to make it, the party has found other ways to find traps. However, when B is there, he gets upset if anyone else tries to take over "his role." This is the major reason I don't want to make the Goblin Rogue I mentioned above - because it would obviously be an NPC made to fill in for his weaknesses.


If B's character has access to magic, why not nudge them towards using this to enhance their trapfinding performance?

His spells (which are set by the class) are more focused on stealth than locks and traps. Also, I can't remember the last time he used one of his spells. That isn't because I have set it up where he can't use his spells. To be honest, I think he's forgotten he has a spell list. (I forgot for a while that he had one.)


Edit to add: barbarians get trap sense,



Trap Sense (Ex) (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/barbarian.htm)

Starting at 3rd level, a barbarian gains a +1 bonus on Reflex saves made to avoid traps and a +1 dodge bonus to AC against attacks made by traps. These bonuses rise by +1 every three barbarian levels thereafter (6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, and 18th level). Trap sense bonuses gained from multiple classes stack.

Trap Sense would not help her find traps. It only helps her if a trap is triggered.


You mention that your wife also plays: is B her annoying kid brother who is trying to get attention, and you are more tolerant of your wife and parents in-law not contributing to the solution to the trap-finding problem?

No. My wife has offered repeatedly to take a larger role in skills. However, when she's done so in the past, B sulks.


There are plenty of ways for a level 9+ party to deal with traps and locks, other than making the party rogue be a locksmith and insisting on maxed out search/disable device/ open locks.

I am well aware of this. I'd be fine if the rest of the party could get involved without B whining. But we've gone down this road before and I know where it leads.


Is this hindrance player immature and selfish, or a sadistic genius who graduated from online trolling to real life trolling?

I'd love to think it's the second, because it means he's pulled off an epic performance. However, it's the first. We used to have another player in the group, R, who had to drop out for RL reasons. B and R had played together a lot previously, and according to R, B just has no idea of he rules of D&D. Not "here's how you behave at the table," but "here's the RAW." That would be OK if he was a new player and wanted to learn, but he doesn't. We suspect that B's previous DM's have either just let him do whatever he wanted, or told him things work a certain way and he assumes what he was told was correct. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?433292-Spellfire&p=19655115&highlight=spellfire#post19655115) (As another example, he thought a Headband of Intellect (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#headbandofIntellect) gave bonuses to skills. Not more skill points, not a boost to INT-based skills (which is does). A boost to ALL skills.)

I admit I'm far from an expert in D&D, and if a player can show me that I am doing something wrong based on the rules, I'll go with what the rules say. However, B can't do that (i.e. powering Spellfire with ki, as per the linked thread above).


Another option: If you suspect that the PC is just bored instead of afraid of being weak. Roll with their weirdness and paranoia, make it weird, but make the weird have rules.
Give the problem PC a curse or magic item where traps are literally attracted to him. When he's within 50 miles of a trap, they animate and come find him. He begins attracting small animated traps that he can command to go set up somewhere or act as scouts. Set up some weird pokemon catching charisma check + combat where he can collect traps to set loose as minions.

:smallbiggrin: That would be cute, but he'd find a way to abuse it.


Not gonna lie, I would of killed his char sessions ago.

I have killed his PCs a few times. He always rebuilds in almost the same way. He will sometimes mix up the exact race or class(es), but it's always a "cat-race" and "caster rogue."


You could just stop putting traps in - they are obviously annoying you and just not working as a game device. They are a feature of the game which can get old.

Honestly, I dislike traps and locked doors unless they serve a real purpose. I'd love to get rid of them. As I said above, I had to add traps to dungeons in a previous campaign because he searched for them whether I had them there or not (and he got upset when he never found them because there was nothing to find).


How you stop meddling around with characters and all that? Constant rebuilding, constant reequipping, what´s all of that stuff for?

It isn't constant. S's character keeps getting rebuilt because she keeps dying. (P has died a few times, but comes back with the same thing. E died once and made a minor tweek to her PC.) This is the first redo the party has had since 4th level, and the reason I did it was because I had figured out that B's character had way more wealth than anyone else.


So? Give him an item that boosts the relevant skill/s. Make it come out of his loot allowance.

Now, if he sells that item to boost his spear.. I got nothing.

I gave him a custom item that boosts his DEX and gives a bonus to Open Lock and Disable Device. He wanted to trade out the skill boosts for more damage, but I told him no.


So I sit down and map out a character plan, level 1 to level 20 and we talk about feats and race, etc.

The only person he would take advice from is our former player, R. (See above.) I've been giving him advice, but he does not want to take it. For example... As I said, he fights with a spear, which means he has to be 10' from monsters to attack. Normally this isn't an issue, but he has literally backed himself into a corner when monsters keep taking 5' steps towards him. I recommended he take Short Haft to allow him to attack 5' away. When he party leveled to 9, instead of taking Short Haft, he came in with the above-mentioned homebrew feat that would allow him to use skill tricks 2/encounter. The only reason he took Short Haft was I said no homebrew. (And he did not want to take Short Haft. He WANTED the homebrew feat and sulked because I said no.)

Edit: I want to clarify the point about "stealing from the party." He is not actually going through their stuff and stealing magical items from them. Instead, he is "double-dipping" from treasure. For example, if the party would get 3000 gp each from selling treasure, but there was a 2000 gp item he wanted to keep, he will keep the 2000 gp item, then write that he has 3000 gp (rather than the 1000 gp he should have).

[Quertus]

according to R, B just has no idea of he rules of D&D. Not "here's how you behave at the table," but "here's the RAW."

I have killed his PCs a few times. He always rebuilds in almost the same way. He will sometimes mix up the exact race or class(es), but it's always a "cat-race" and "caster rogue."

Honestly, I dislike traps and locked doors unless they serve a real purpose. I'd love to get rid of them. As I said above, I had to add traps to dungeons in a previous campaign because he searched for them whether I had them there or not (and he got upset when he never found them because there was nothing to find).

This is the first redo the party has had since 4th level, and the reason I did it was because I had figured out that B's character had way more wealth than anyone else.

I gave him a custom item that boosts his DEX and gives a bonus to Open Lock and Disable Device. He wanted to trade out the skill boosts for more damage, but I told him no.

The only person he would take advice from is our former player, R. (See above.) I've been giving him advice, but he does not want to take it.

The only reason he took Short Haft was I said no homebrew.

You know he doesn't understand the rules, and that the two of you talk past each other.

You've taken away his theft, his cheating, his cheating, and homebrew. For B, that's the level of nerf of taking away a fighter's BAB, HP, and feats - he's got nothing left!

My suggestion is to give his character sheet to the playground. Let us rebuild him - stronger, faster. I'm confident a catty caster rogue with custom items, spear, and ability to deal with traps is within our capabilities to create.

When we're done (and when there are traps ahead!), ask tell him to try out the rebuild for one session. Afterwards, have a discussion with him, about whether he liked (hopefully) actually being able to deal with traps. Ask him to compare the two characters - what he likes and dislikes about each. Listen to his side. And report back.

[Caedes]

1) The player wants to be a trapfinder. That isn't a role I pushed on him. He's just really bad at it.
2) I have a long (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?444326-More-Player-Problems&p=19852365#post19852365) history (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?440179-Troublesome-Player&p=19787395#post19787395) of problems (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19531874&postcount=17) with him (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?412002-%283-5%29-Problems-With-the-Party&p=19172402#post19172402). Also, there are other issues unrelated to his playing that are pushing me towards kicking him.

I was on the fence about this situation until I read this.

Sometimes, in a D&D group or any type of social group there can be conflicting personality types. Or a person might want something different than the rest of the party.

So, I think you can talk with them out of character and apart from the rest and see what he wants out of the game. And if what they want is completely apart from where the game is at and you feel you cannot come to a middle with them, then it might be time to part ways.

I think, most things can come to a middle when it comes to tabletop issues. But, if they can't. There are things much worse than replacing a person at the table.

[Toilet Cobra]

Given the laundry list of problems with this player, personally I would fire him. "Your services as a player in this campaign are unfortunately no longer needed at this time. Please accept this half-empty bag of Cool Ranch Doritos as your severance package."

BUT since you're keeping him... have you considered just subtracting 5 from the DC for all the traps? Or 10, if that's what it takes? He'll get the rush of finding the traps he apparently wants so bad, and nobody will have to deal with him leading them to their doom.

[Kesnit]

You've taken away his theft, his cheating, his cheating, and homebrew. For B, that's the level of nerf of taking away a fighter's BAB, HP, and feats - he's got nothing left!

I can't tell if you are saying I did a bad thing or not. :smallconfused:


My suggestion is to give his character sheet to the playground. Let us rebuild him - stronger, faster. I'm confident a catty caster rogue with custom items, spear, and ability to deal with traps is within our capabilities to create.

I would be happy to do so, if I could get a copy of the class he is using. I don't have the book (and it's third party), so I need to get a copy of his class write-up. I asked him for it at our last game and he said he would scan it and e-mail it to me. (I offered to scan the pages while he was there and give the book back to him, but he said no.) If I get it, I will post his build, including class features. Our next game isn't until the 21st (because I'm out of town this weekend), so I may not see it until next week.


When we're done (and when there are traps ahead!), ask tell him to try out the rebuild for one session. Afterwards, have a discussion with him, about whether he liked (hopefully) actually being able to deal with traps. Ask him to compare the two characters - what he likes and dislikes about each. Listen to his side. And report back.

It doesn't hurt to try.


Sometimes, in a D&D group or any type of social group there can be conflicting personality types. Or a person might want something different than the rest of the party.

So, I think you can talk with them out of character and apart from the rest and see what he wants out of the game.

A good idea, and one thing I have never asked him. It would be interesting to see what he says.


Given the laundry list of problems with this player, personally I would fire him. "Your services as a player in this campaign are unfortunately no longer needed at this time. Please accept this half-empty bag of Cool Ranch Doritos as your severance package."

:smallbiggrin:


BUT since you're keeping him... have you considered just subtracting 5 from the DC for all the traps? Or 10, if that's what it takes? He'll get the rush of finding the traps he apparently wants so bad, and nobody will have to deal with him leading them to their doom.

I can do that, and it would solve the problem short-term. But I suspect that if he sees he is making the checks, he will think he can continue to make the checks. So instead of putting points into the skills, he'll continue to put them into skill tricks and Appraise (which he also has several ranks in). One or two areas on, the DCs will be so high that I'd have to subtract 10, or more, to allow him to make the checks. At that point, I'd almost be better off giving him a flat (unknown to him) percentile chance to find any traps or open any locks, and any time there is one, roll a d100 to see if he makes it.

[Starbuck_II]

You could just give easier to find traps/locks? Like weaker ones. You say he fails them, how much does he fail? Design easier ones (yes, the module expects certain +X to disable, you lower it by 5 or whatever).

That way he gets what he wants: the ability to do his "role".

And I agree, he is really bad at cheating. You usually expect a cheater to cheat to make themselves good. :smallbiggrin:

Can you give us a few examples of DCs of traps/locks he has failed?
Or his skill bonuses so we know how much he needed.

[eggynack]

Traps are dumb. Get rid of basically all of them, and instead use dungeonscape encounter traps, which are the elegant solution to all trap problems. That way, you still have the traps the player wants, and said traps are made easier if the character gets some trap skill, but it’s not an all or nothing proposition, and the party can help with not-trap abilities.

[Kesnit]

Can you give us a few examples of DCs of traps/locks he has failed?
Or his skill bonuses so we know how much he needed.

The DCs are usually 30 or 32. I believe he has +16 in Search. His DD is a little lower.


Traps are dumb. Get rid of basically all of them, and instead use dungeonscape encounter traps,

The first time I did that, the entire party rebelled. B got stumped when the solution wasn't "roll Disable Device and disable the trap." S made an effort to solve the encounter, but managed to fail all the checks. (She was playing a Clawlock at the time and hadn't put points into Search or Spot.)

There was an encounter trap two sessions ago. (B didn't find it.) E and S managed to avoid it by flying (E) or using spider-climb (S). B and P fell down the slope and got stuck behind an ice wall. B pretty much gave up trying to get himself out, until E came up with the idea of hacking the wall until it broke. That idea worked, and B did work to break down the wall, but only after someone else figured out how.

[ATHATH]

I don't think we'll need the hombrew class- a Spellthief should scratch B's "sneaky spellcaster" itch.

[Kesnit]

I don't think we'll need the hombrew class- a Spellthief should scratch B's "sneaky spellcaster" itch.

Actually, one of this class features is something he likes, and is the reason he uses a spear. I don't know the exact mechanics (which is why I want the class write-up...), but it's a skill trick-like thing that allows him to use a polearm weapon to make Jump checks to move around the battlefield.

And I wouldn't be too sure that Spellthief would scratch his itch. When I realized he was playing a Rogue/SORC (with equal levels of both) previously, I pointed him towards Daggerspell Mage. He kept saying he would take the PrC, but every time the party leveled, he came up with a new reason not to take it. (He met all the requirements; he just didn't take the class.)

[ATHATH]

Actually, one of this class features is something he likes, and is the reason he uses a spear. I don't know the exact mechanics (which is why I want the class write-up...), but it's a skill trick-like thing that allows him to use a polearm weapon to make Jump checks to move around the battlefield.

And I wouldn't be too sure that Spellthief would scratch his itch. When I realized he was playing a Rogue/SORC (with equal levels of both) previously, I pointed him towards Daggerspell Mage. He kept saying he would take the PrC, but every time the party leveled, he came up with a new reason not to take it. (He met all the requirements; he just didn't take the class.)
Would the Mantis Leap feat satisfy him (if I found a way to get around the requirement of 7 levels of Monk)? What about Travel Devotion?

How comfortable is your group with Psionics? I think a Psychic Rogue might fit even better.

[Gildedragon]

Sorry to say: the skill trick he is using doesn't exist... Buuuuut
Spellthief+swordsage (get leaping dragon stance) + Extreme Leap skill trick will scratch his jumpy itch... He might as well be Tigger then

[Kesnit]

Would the Mantis Leap feat satisfy him (if I found a way to get around the requirement of 7 levels of Monk)?

Maybe. I am not sure what he would or would not like.


What about Travel Devotion?

Nope, because it is only once per day. I've had problems with him in the past using special abilities more than he is allowed to. (He used Boots of Speed at least 12 rounds in one day. I wasn't counting his uses because it never occurred me to at the time he would cheat like that. I count now, after it was pointed out that he used the Boots more rounds than covered 3 castings of a spell that lasted 4 rounds. He used skill tricks every few rounds until I realized they are each 1/encounter.)


How comfortable is your group with Psionics? I think a Psychic Rogue might fit even better.

I have no problem with psionics, but, again, I don't know how B would feel about using them.

[eggynack]

I guess I'd consider the DC dropping option, but kicking him might just be better. Not just because he sucks at traps, but because he sounds like a real hassle to game with.

[ATHATH]

Maybe B would like playing a Warlock (yes, I know that your party already has one, but it seems like a perfect fit) more than whatever hombrew class he's currently playing. It's got the at-will stuff that he craves, some pseudo-casting, and some rogue-ish stuff.

[Honest Tiefling]

I'm getting mildly suspicious, given his earlier cheating and 'thieves steal, but I didn't steal, but I am a thief, so I stole' circular logic. One half-eaten bag of Cool Ranch Doritos says that he might not be 100% legit on that class. I would demand to see it, on the basis that you want to it to help you design encounters. (Which is true.)

If he fails to provide it, just ignore him. He's clearly uninterested in helping, and you have access to a scanner so he could arrange to come early to show it to you. He's not making it easy to help him.

If he's been lying about the class, third strike, give him the boot.

[Gildedragon]

Maybe. I am not sure what he would or would not like.



Nope, because it is only once per day. I've had problems with him in the past using special abilities more than he is allowed to. (He used Boots of Speed at least 12 rounds in one day. I wasn't counting his uses because it never occurred me to at the time he would cheat like that. I count now, after it was pointed out that he used the Boots more rounds than covered 3 castings of a spell that lasted 4 rounds. He used skill tricks every few rounds until I realized they are each 1/encounter.)



I have no problem with psionics, but, again, I don't know how B would feel about using them.

Jeesh. I'm going to assume kicking off the table isn't an option.

Because of the abuse of limited times per day thing... I'd say warlock is probably the best choice. Mix warlock with rogue with some arcane trickster class (arcane trickster is great, if you rule them qualifying); focus him on clawlock-ing (fits with the cat theme)

now that I'm home with books:

build sugestion:
Dark Catfolk
Rogue 1, Warlock 5*, Spellthief 1, Arcane Trickster 10

1: Craven OR Catfolk Pounce OR Improved Unarmed Strike
3: Martial Study (Wolf Fang Strike)
6: Eldritch Claws (Dr 358)
9: Darkstalker OR Craven OR Superior Unarmed Strike
12: Martial Stance (Leaping Dragon Stance)
...

They get 1 attack (claws or blast) they can do all day long, they can bounce around all the livelong day, and they have decent skill monkeyness.
They have no limited use powers (other than wolf fang strike) and ranged legerdemain (which boosts the ability you want them to use)

[SethoMarkus]

I'm not really sure if there is a solution to this problem other than extensive conversation...

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but the build seems to be a secondary problem. You have Player saying "I want to do X." Dm, "Are you sure you want to do X?" Player, "Yes, I am doing X." Proceeds to do Y. OtherPlayer tries to do X. "Hey! X is my job, back off!" DM tries to help Player be better at X, Player instead tries to get better at Y.

It's just an endless cycle of the player trying to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to be the sneaky skill-monkey type character, but he builds a trick using combatant instead.

[Sword-Geass]

I don't know if this has been mentioned or not, and atm I lack the time to read the entire thread (although I will read it in a while), but if the problem with his skills is that he is not putting points into them because he is expending all of them in skull tricks you should point at him that a character can't have more than half his HD in skull tricks, so if he is lvl9 that means 5 tricks, not a single one more than that. That won't leave them more option than to advance his skills, and it's also part of the rules so he has to swallow it.

[Kesnit]

I guess I'd consider the DC dropping option, but kicking him might just be better. Not just because he sucks at traps, but because he sounds like a real hassle to game with.

He’s been a pain since he joined the group. To be honest, I want to kick him, but I feel bad about wanting to…


Maybe B would like playing a Warlock (yes, I know that your party already has one, but it seems like a perfect fit) more than whatever hombrew class he's currently playing. It's got the at-will stuff that he craves, some pseudo-casting, and some rogue-ish stuff.

You would think so. However, Warlocks don't get Sneak Attack dice, and he’s all about “all damage, all the time.” I know it’s possible to build a high-damage Warlock – I built S’s Clawlock, who was a Blend-o-matic – but I did it using the Warlock and Totemist handbooks, as well as book diving. (Totemist handbook for feats and gear to boost natural attacks.) I already know he won’t take any recommendations that I give him on building and he doesn't do any of his own research. He’d likely end up with Hideous Blow (because it does melee!) and complaining that his PC is boring and can't do anything.

Besides, he knows that I know how Warlocks work. I’ve built 2 Warlocks for S, played an Eldritch Disciple in another game, and used Eldritch Theurges as caster enemies in a previous campaign. He can't bluff me into thinking he can do something he can't.


I'm getting mildly suspicious, given his earlier cheating and 'thieves steal, but I didn't steal, but I am a thief, so I stole' circular logic. One half-eaten bag of Cool Ranch Doritos says that he might not be 100% legit on that class.

I doubt he is, which is why I asked for the book with the class so I can scan the pages. He showed me the class before he took it, so I have seen it. But that was several months (and several levels) ago.


If he fails to provide it, just ignore him. He's clearly uninterested in helping, and you have access to a scanner so he could arrange to come early to show it to you. He's not making it easy to help him.

S wants me to tell him that if he doesn't send me the class description, his character sheet, and his updated gear list before next game, he isn't welcome at game. I'm willing to let him bring everything to game for me to scan, but if he won't let me see his sheet, I don't want to let him play. (And I still feel bad for saying that.)


Jeesh. I'm going to assume kicking off the table isn't an option.

I feel bad about doing that.


I'd say warlock is probably the best choice. Mix warlock with rogue with some arcane trickster class (arcane trickster is great, if you rule them qualifying);

I would have no problem with Warlock qualifying for Arcane Trickster. I doubt he'd take it, though. As I said, I showed him Daggerspell Mage on his Rogue/SORC and he didn't want to take it.


build sugestion:
Dark Catfolk
Rogue 1, Warlock 5*, Spellthief 1, Arcane Trickster 10

1: Craven OR Catfolk Pounce OR Improved Unarmed Strike
3: Martial Study (Wolf Fang Strike)
6: Eldritch Claws (Dr 358)
9: Darkstalker OR Craven OR Superior Unarmed Strike
12: Martial Stance (Leaping Dragon Stance)

The build looks good at first read. (I can go over everything in detail later.) However, since he won't take my advice for anything, there's really no chance he'd consider it. (That isn't a dig at you. I really do appreciate the time you took to put that together!)


I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but the build seems to be a secondary problem. You have Player saying "I want to do X." Dm, "Are you sure you want to do X?" Player, "Yes, I am doing X." Proceeds to do Y. OtherPlayer tries to do X. "Hey! X is my job, back off!" DM tries to help Player be better at X, Player instead tries to get better at Y.

That pretty much covers it, yes.


I don't know if this has been mentioned or not, and atm I lack the time to read the entire thread (although I will read it in a while), but if the problem with his skills is that he is not putting points into them because he is expending all of them in skull tricks you should point at him that a character can't have more than half his HD in skull tricks, so if he is lvl9 that means 5 tricks, not a single one more than that.

I'm not sure how many he has. (He won't let me see his sheet.) I know at least one of the things he is doing is supposed to be a class feature (since it isn't a skill trick. I looked.)

[Honest Tiefling]

S wants me to tell him that if he doesn't send me the class description, his character sheet, and his updated gear list before next game, he isn't welcome at game. I'm willing to let him bring everything to game for me to scan, but if he won't let me see his sheet, I don't want to let him play. (And I still feel bad for saying that.)

This S person is a smart cookie. You have done well to wife her.

This is a person who has lied to your face multiple times. I doubt they are young enough for it to be a learning experience after what...THE FIFTH TIME? I've honestly lost track of how many times they've cheated and I am too lazy to spend hours counting it up. They must be aware that their balant cheating and forcing you to police them is not aiding your enjoyment of the game. They do not respect you. They do not care about your fun, or that of the party. THEY ARE LYING TO YOUR FACE.

Why are you friends with this person!?

[ATHATH]

Maybe a Totemist, then? They roll lots of dice.

[Gildedragon]

He’s been a pain since he joined the group. To be honest, I want to kick him, but I feel bad about wanting to…
...
I feel bad about doing that.

I get you feeling bad but if he's being a nuisance... well
i mean i do advocate a gentler touch than "get out"... which brings me to the next thing:


I would have no problem with Warlock qualifying for Arcane Trickster. I doubt he'd take it, though. As I said, I showed him Daggerspell Mage on his Rogue/SORC and he didn't want to take it... However, since he won't take my advice for anything, there's really no chance he'd consider it. (That isn't a dig at you. I really do appreciate the time you took to put that together!)
First: It was no trouble; i had the rogue side of things already done, and I just spliced on some warlock-magics

What I'm saying is: tell him something along the lines of "yeah you keep 'forgetting' the rules and limits, and I keep not noticing: so to make me feel more comfortable here are X different character builds I feel more familiar with, and I'll let you know if you go past their rules" ie: pick something I can trust you with, or...



I'm not sure how many he has. (He won't let me see his sheet.) I know at least one of the things he is doing is supposed to be a class feature (since it isn't a skill trick. I looked.)
As the DM you can say: Sheet or GTFO
Again come clear with the player that you've noticed them 'bending' the rules without your approval a couple times (mention the loot redoubling, the abuse of charged magic items, the abuse of 1/encounter powers) and you'd like to make sure the character is on the up and up. They can either give you the sheet and rebuild to be legal (or else) OR they can take a premade build.

[Blackhawk748]

1. Player has Cheated
2. Player wont let you see the sheet
3. Player has LIED to you

Yup its time for....

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/8/81805/1685009-banhammer.jpg

Dont feel bad about it. You have been more than generous to them.

[nedz]

He’s been a pain since he joined the group. To be honest, I want to kick him, but I feel bad about wanting to…

Use peer pressure - assuming the whole group feel the same way.

I find that this is the best way of dealing with problem players.

You need to talk to the rest of your group and then act together.

[Starbuck_II]

1. Player has Cheated
2. Player wont let you see the sheet
3. Player has LIED to you

Yup its time for....

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/8/81805/1685009-banhammer.jpg

Dont feel bad about it. You have been more than generous to them.

He already used it.

Remember someone said: "You've taken away his theft, his cheating, his cheating, and homebrew. For B, that's the level of nerf of taking away a fighter's BAB, HP, and feats - he's got nothing left!"

[Fizban]

Do the math, and his weapon and crystals alone are 30,000 of his 40,000.
I first read this as just crystals and thought you meant he was stacking them, which you can't do (only 1 per item).


I feel like at least some small part of the problem here is the inherent expectation that any class with trap finding in it necessitates it's player being the trap monkey. There are dozens of more effective and safer options for finding traps.

Does anyone think the DM in this scenario is kind of a ****? Trying to push a character into rebuilding because the character doesn't have the skills the DM thinks he should have and then declaring the character bad and talking about kicking the player out of the group because of it?[/I]
Even ignoring the further explanation we've been given: you signed up for The World's Largest Dungeon, what did you expect? There ways to dance around the issue, but the only reliable guaranteed "this will deal with it because it's designed to do so" answer is a character with trapfinding and maxed bonus. Alternate solutions are never so simple and the easiest, cheapest way to do it is right there.

I'm not personally a fan of stealing from the party, but it is a valid play style.
No, it's not. Treasure is a player reward that drives character growth just like experience points, and stealing from the party is never okay unless the group has agreed to such PvP allowances beforehand. This goes double in a game that's essentially just a giant dungeon crawl, and triple when the DM has specifically altered the module to allow buying/selling for character growth because they're aware of it.

Which brings up the question: why are you letting this guy keep track of the loot? He can only embezzle if he's the one cooking the books. Track the loot yourself, or let one of the trustworthy players do it if that'd be too much extra DM duty.

I would be happy to do so, if I could get a copy of the class he is using. I don't have the book (and it's third party), so I need to get a copy of his class write-up. I asked him for it at our last game and he said he would scan it and e-mail it to me. (I offered to scan the pages while he was there and give the book back to him, but he said no.) If I get it, I will post his build, including class features. Our next game isn't until the 21st (because I'm out of town this weekend), so I may not see it until next week.
You have learned two valuable lessons. Never allow anything you don't have a written copy of (paper or link), and don't let problem players keep their own character sheets-they keep it online where you can see it and you can save copies to catch their bs when they try to change something. At next meeting do not ask: tell him you're copying the book and his sheet, stick out your hand and wait.


For fixing the skill check problem, if he's not going to keep his bonus up with skill points then he'll have to buy enough bonuses to make up for it. He's the one who agreed to perform that role and refuses to give it up so he's got no right to complain. But really it sounds like it'd be better to just kick him.

[Sliver]

I'm not going to be too nice in this post.

You should be more considerate towards your players, and less selfish.

You haven't kicked out an uncooperative and cheating player that actually reduces the enjoyment of play to you and the rest of the players, because you feel bad.

Grow up. You are going to have plenty of unpleasant encounters, and you will have interactions where not all sides are satisfied. You will rarely have a perfect experience, so your goal should be to optimize the experience with the tools you are given.

"No gaming is better than bad gaming" is a sentence that is often said when a player asks advice regarding a game in which said player is not having fun, but there is no possibility of change. Do you want to create this situation for the rest of your players, because you don't like the idea of not being nice towards a dishonest player?

This is not an isolated incident. Even if he ends up providing the class, and fixing his current character, the problem will not disappear. Either you will have to police him, or you'll notice the same issues in a few levels, or in the next campaign.

Other than you "feeling bad" about fixing it, you gave no reason why this person is still part of your group.

[Yahzi]

Any advice (other than "kick B out.")
Lower the DCs of the traps.

I mean, what are you trying to accomplish here? If you are trying to "prove" the dungeon can be beaten, and you know the player could have +5 on his skill checks by doing X, then just subtract 5 from all the DCs in the dungeon. The player gets to have fun, the dungeon gets run faithfully. What's the downside?

EDIT: On the other hand, a player that won't let you see his character sheet is... I don't even. What? That's the same as a player who won't let you see his dice rolls. You don't have to kick him out; you and he are already playing different games. You just have to not be there while he plays his game.

[Sian]

Such a player is the primary reason why I, when i DM'ed had a clear rule that i kept the sheets (also, a player, which was otherways a very good player, had a tendency to misplace it, when they kept it themselves). I was willing to make exceptions for those I knew from experience could handle it (primarily the two guys that ran games as well, in smaller 'sub-groups'), but default rules was "DM keeps the sheets"

Also, I had a ironclad rule stating that homebrew were explicitly disallowed, unless i could see it and keep a copy of it, and even then I'd most often be inclined to shake and say no unless the player could prove that it was needed to make the character into how he visioned it.

You've given the player several second chances and unless you're willing to let the hammer drop, it might as well be infinite chances which in turn means that they have no reason to follow your rules since you're unwilling to follow up on them.

[Kesnit]

1. Player has Cheated 2. Player wont let you see the sheet 3. Player has LIED to you

Well, when you put it that way…


Use peer pressure - assuming the whole group feel the same way.

S and P do. When I talked to E prior to last game session, she was non-committal, but is the one who recommended giving B the chance to rebuild. (As I said before, she is new-ish to the group and was not around for any of the events in the threads I linked to. I sent her the links, but she told me later she had not read them prior to last game.) S spoke to her after last game, but I only caught part of the conversation. (I was walking the dog.) E understands where we are coming from, but (as far as I know) has not advocated kicking B out. I have not gotten a chance to talk to E myself.

If I knew all my players support booting B, I’d have no problem doing it. As I said, I have not had a chance to talk to E myself. Given how non-committal she was before, I really don’t know what she’ll say when I do get the chance


I'm not going to be too nice in this post.

You were nicer than you think.


You should be more considerate towards your players, and less selfish.

If the objecting players were anyone except my wife and mother-in-law, I’d be less concerned about kicking B. However, the players actually advocating for that are the players who are emotionally invested in me. I'm afraid kicking him will appear to be an echo chamber, where we ganged up on him.

That said...


You haven't kicked out an uncooperative and cheating player that actually reduces the enjoyment of play to you and the rest of the players, because you feel bad.

Putting it that way does put a different spin on things.


You are going to have plenty of unpleasant encounters, and you will have interactions where not all sides are satisfied.

I know. (I'm a lawyer in real life.)


This is not an isolated incident. Even if he ends up providing the class, and fixing his current character, the problem will not disappear. Either you will have to police him, or you'll notice the same issues in a few levels, or in the next campaign.

I kept hoping he would get a clue, but you are right. He won't.


Other than you "feeling bad" about fixing it, you gave no reason why this person is still part of your group

Because we had a devil of a time finding players.


EDIT: On the other hand, a player that won't let you see his character sheet is... I don't even. What?

The not letting me see his character sheet took me off guard. He originally said he'd give me a copy, then told me he'd e-mail it to me as he left.


Such a player is the primary reason why I, when i DM'ed had a clear rule that i kept the sheets (also, a player, which was otherways a very good player, had a tendency to misplace it, when they kept it themselves).

This whole situation is rather new to me. I've run a lot of games with a lot of people, but I've never had a player like this before.


Also, I had a ironclad rule stating that homebrew were explicitly disallowed, unless i could see it and keep a copy of it, and even then I'd most often be inclined to shake and say no unless the player could prove that it was needed to make the character into how he visioned it.

I did put my foot down on homebrew. I know there is some good, balanced, reasonable homebrew, but also know a lot is really bad. I decided it was easier to just say no, rather than try to sort through and judge everything he gave me.


You've given the player several second chances and unless you're willing to let the hammer drop, it might as well be infinite chances which in turn means that they have no reason to follow your rules since you're unwilling to follow up on them.

Understood.

I am going to send E an e-mail to get her take on things, now that she has had the experience of seeing him whine (and trying to work with him while he did), and she has read the old threads where I've discussed his actions. She isn't an outside party, but she is not related to me and is a trained mediator.

I want to thank you all for helping me with this situation. As I said above, I was afraid my wife and I were becoming an echo chamber for each other and our shared opinion of B. I do feel better, knowing that other people (who aren't emotionally invested in me) think I am justified in my frustation.

[HolyDraconus]

I have killed his PCs a few times. He always rebuilds in almost the same way. He will sometimes mix up the exact race or class(es), but it's always a "cat-race" and "caster rogue."


You're doing it wrong. Death should always have a penalty. If you have killed him a few times and penalized him each time as I would have, he couldn't contribute to the party in that manner.
" Your character died due to your mistakes"
"Well, I'm going to roll up a new one!"
"Sure, but you start a level lower, with 0 experience. Each time you die and reroll in this campaign you start one level lower than before. For example. Your new char will be 7. If it dies, and you make another, that one will be 6."
"But won't I get left behind by the party?"
"Not necessarily! The Experience chart works it to where every char, regardless of what level it starts off at, will eventually catch up to the highest party member, at some point."
" But I can't contribute to the combat sequences!"
"Not immediately, no, but your character is multifaceted, like you, and can do other things besides combat! Like disarming traps, if you wished, or dialogue interactions with npcs! You may even uncover clues to helping your party out in such a manner!"
In which case he either quits cause he believes the penalty is harsh (which it should be) or goes along with it. If the latter, expect the char to die and stand firm with the penalty. He will be testing you at that point to see if you will really go through with it.

And yes, I done this to my own players. Dropped one player all the way back to level 1 in a party of level 14s because he didn't want to play ball. He plays now.

[Kelb_Panthera]

What are you doing?

I'd be well past cutting him and well toward cutting him at this point, if you catch my drift. He's uncooperative, dishonest, and generally aggravating to game with. You don't have to, and shouldn't, put up with this crap. Boot him as gently as your feelings allow. I'd have given him the bums' rush* out of my house by now.




*Executed by grabbing the offending party by the back of his collar and the wasteband of his pants and marching him to the front door, at which point you literally use the hand-holds you have to physically hurl him into the street.

[Kesnit]

You're doing it wrong. Death should always have a penalty. If you have killed him a few times and penalized him each time as I would have, he couldn't contribute to the party in that manner.
" Your character died due to your mistakes"
"Well, I'm going to roll up a new one!"
"Sure, but you start a level lower, with 0 experience. Each time you die and reroll in this campaign you start one level lower than before. For example. Your new char will be 7. If it dies, and you make another, that one will be 6."

This works for you, and that's fine. But it wouldn't work for my game for two reasons. First, PCs die through no fault of the player. I don't run the kind of campaign where I kill a PC every game, but I make my combats challenging. Punishing a player because of their own actions is one thing. Punishing a player because the dice didn't like them one night is another. Second and more important, I don't give XP. I'm holding the party level to the level of the dungeon and level them as they progress.


"Not immediately, no, but your character is multifaceted, like you, and can do other things besides combat! Like disarming traps, if you wished, or dialogue interactions with npcs! You may even uncover clues to helping your party out in such a manner!"

One point of contention is that E, S, and P all RP and interact with the residents of the dungeon. B just wants to kill everything, and will get frustrated if an encounter gets resolved through dialogue.


What are you doing?

I e-mailed E last night to get her take on the situation. However, I am very close to contacting him and telling him he isn't welcome here any more.

Posting this thread and reading everyone's comments has been very cathartic to me. It's given me a new perspective on the whole situation, and forced me to look back over everything he has done.

This whole situation is really new to me, which is surprising given that I have been gaming for about 10 years. (I got a late start.) I've had bad DMs (who I have walked away from), and played with bad players (who usually removed themselves from the games when they realized the DM wouldn't tolerate their behavior). But most of the players and groups I've gamed with have been amazing. This is my first experience with an incompetent, cheating player who refuses to learn or play by the rules. (Or sulks when forced to play by the rules.) That is a big part of why I am so hesitant to just kick him out - I can't believe that B really is as bad as he is. "There has to be something else going on. Maybe if I work with him enough, I can fix the problem and he'll become a good player." Stupid, I know.

[Florian]

@Kesnit:

Do yourself the favor and read what you have posted so far in a detached stance.
You come across like a victim defending the perpetrator because you already know the outcome and just don´t like it.

[nedz]

@Kesnit:

Do yourself the favor and read what you have posted so far in a detached stance.
You come across like a victim defending the perpetrator because you already know the outcome and just don´t like it.

TL;DR: Stockholm syndrome ?

[Kesnit]

@Kesnit:

Do yourself the favor and read what you have posted so far in a detached stance.
You come across like a victim defending the perpetrator because you already know the outcome and just don´t like it.

I didn't mean it to come out like that, but as I wrote my last post, I realized it. I admit, I phrased the part in quotes at the end the way I did on purpose.

[Hiro Quester]

It sounds like although you feel that way, you would also like to give the player one last chance.

If you do, it seems that you need to be very clear and explicit about the problems you are having, and how it affects the fun of the game for everyone. You seem to have been hoping he will come to understand some things, but hasn't, or refuses to make changes in his behavior and choices.

Perhaps he needs to be told even more explicitly, and clearly.

Tell him the kinds of things you have told us here. Tell him that it's starting to seem like the only solution to the problem is to have him leave the group. Tell him that he needs to play as a full member of the party, better fill his party role, and play the whole game (RP and so on) not just the killing monsters part, or the party will have to find a way to move on without him.

[Honest Tiefling]

It sounds like although you feel that way, you would also like to give the player one last chance.

If you do, it seems that you need to be very clear and explicit about the problems you are having, and how it affects the fun of the game for everyone. You seem to have been hoping he will come to understand some things, but hasn't, or refuses to make changes in his behavior and choices.

Perhaps he needs to be told even more explicitly, and clearly.

Tell him the kinds of things you have told us here. Tell him that it's starting to seem like the only solution to the problem is to have him leave the group. Tell him that he needs to play as a full member of the party, better fill his party role, and play the whole game (RP and so on) not just the killing monsters part, or the party will have to find a way to move on without him.

I quoted this, because this! I would just add two things:
1) If you give him a second chance, make sure the party is okay with it. Seems like a few want to see him leave.
2) Don't tell him to better fill his role. Tell him if he wants to fulfill that role with no help from the party and be the only one capable of it, he needs to actually do it.

[Kish]

2) I have a long (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?444326-More-Player-Problems&p=19852365#post19852365) history (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?440179-Troublesome-Player&p=19787395#post19787395) of problems (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19531874&postcount=17) with him (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?412002-%283-5%29-Problems-With-the-Party&p=19172402#post19172402).
I read this and scrapped the post I had started to write.

Kick him. If you can, send a message to your past self to kick him well before you find yourself moved to start this thread, because it's long overdue.

(Though I do not an apparent shift in attitude toward locks and traps; if you don't like them you don't have to use them just because the module sez so, you know.)

[Gildedragon]

Even if you do kick the guy out: do consider fusing skills (like open lock and disable device) it'll make filling that role easier for the party and help slim down skill bloating

[Nibbens]

If you don't want to boot the guy because of reasons, then there may be a solution in the way you present the traps.

I remember reading somewhere (and it's advice I take to heart) that a traps purpose is not to damage the party because they couldn't see it...

DM: You see a hallway. What do you do?
PC: I walk down it to here.
DM: Stop. as you get to this point, you spring a trap. You take XdX damage from this thing.

... but rather to pose an interesting scenario for the PCs to solve...

DM: You see a hallway, however something about this patch of stones looks strange to you. What do you do?
PC: Perception check. What's exactly wrong with the stones?
DM: (PC fails the check) this patch looks out of place./(PC succeeds) this patch clearly has a pressure plate underneath it.
PC: Well, I avoid the spot for sure. I do another check to see if there's anything else in the hallway...

In the second scenario, the PCs have been presented with a problem, and solved it. Award XP for the trap (or none, in your case because you're leveling them as they go), and everyone's happy. The point of the trap is not to needlessly scratch HP off their character sheets, but to fill the dungeon with danger. You'll notice that even in the failed roll, the PC still surpassed the trap. Sure, he doesn't know what it was, nor what it did - but that wasn't the point in the first place.

In all honesty, that mysterious patch of rocks could be even more compelling than the trap you fully explain. PCs will go forward, perhaps always wondering what it was they passed up. What if there was a pit trap with treasure down in the bottom? All of a sudden, the PC in question may want to start putting more points into what he should be, because he wants all that loot. lol.

[Andorn]

In-game problems merit in-game solutions. In this case, you have two in-game problems. First, party member stealing from the party. As mentioned above, that has hopefully been addressed. Second, character failing to pull his weight in the party. That's for an in-game solution. If I worked at a company and one of my employees wasn't working, I'd call him on it, and if he messed up repeatedly, I'd let him go. Same thing in a party of PCs; if one character isn't contributing to the party's success, the other characters would reasonably tell him to start keeping up, or let him go.

The thing to remember is that letting the character go isn't kicking the player out. It's saying "This particular character has poisoned the well; we're done with him. Go roll a new character and bring him along."

And it's not unreasonable, if the other players agree. If they feel that his character really isn't keeping up, it's not unreasonable for the other PCs to say, "Look, chief, it's not us, it's you. You're not adding to our success. Best of luck, now scram."

I agree with the in-game solution. The solution is let the traps cause the party all sorts of grief, instead of playing favorites to safeguard them.

Once people start getting hurt bad, losing items on blown saving throws, or even people dying, they will take traps seriously. Once they take traps seriously, they will take trapfinding and disarming seriously.

Once they take finding/disarming traps seriously, they will seriously want someone who is competent. Then you offer them a choice: a well-designed (by you) NPC comes along and offers their services, for a full share of treasure (in direct competition to the troublesome PC).

When the group starts looking at the loot the other player is scoring, and not doing anything for, they'll start to consider ditching him. You can help this along by roleplaying: having your NPC make private comments (via notes, or sidebars) with individual characters, with the intention of getting rid of the character who is a problem, so each group member gets a better share.

If the group opts to dump the problem character, you can gracefully offer the well-designed NPC to the player who is now lacking a character. Or, your NPC can start stealing from the troublesome character, because he/she is feeling like their share is undeserved. Let the group choose between someone who keeps them safe, and someone who is a leech.

Whatever happens, it will result in more depth in your game, as characters start acting like people would in real life, in your game. Ultimately, adventuring is survival of the fittest, you shouldn't go easy on a player or the group if they are screwing up by the numbers.

[Andorn]

Combat, yes. He does damage. RP - no. His character sheet says True Neutral, but he plays Evil. His only concern is finding the next combat, regardless of what the rest of the party wants.


That is easily solved. The group meets a paladin. The guy detects as evil to the paladin, regardless of what the character sheet says. Mayhem ensues.

I think you should utilize impartiality, and let the party/characters suffer actual consequences for the choices they make. Make sure to write down what traps and stuff do before hand. Write down a sketch of any NPCs the party may run into. Include NPC motives, tendencies, and habits/automatic reactions.

There is an RPG named Burning Wheel, which has roleplaying goals built into the rule system. This could easily be adapted to D&D. Just have players write down the sort of stuff BW requires as part of a character. Then each session, award small, but significant, XP awards for roleplaying well. Have the group vote on who did the best job, who was the party workhorse, who used their class abilities best, who worked towards their goals best, etc. Rank the players 1, 2, 3. First place gets 50% of the award pool, 2nd place gets 33%, and 3rd place gets 17% of the session's RP XP award. If the players start getting material rewards for playing well, they will work at it more.



Technically, I can. However, P has enough problems keeping track of 1 PC; I know she'd struggle with 2. (She played a Bard in a previous campaign. The only song she used was Inspire Courage - which, granted, is good - and only cast spells when it was pointed out to her that she had the perfect spell on her list.) Also, I live with S and P*, which would cause a weird dynamic.

*As I said above, S is my wife. P is her mother.


You're playing D&D with your Mother-In-Law??? I can't decide if you're insane, a saint, or the most guileful DM I've ever heard of. We're not worthy.




No. My wife has offered repeatedly to take a larger role in skills. However, when she's done so in the past, B sulks.



Tough. He sounds like a spoiled brat. Be impartial, stop cutting him so much slack. It's a power game, can he get you to do what he wants? As the DM, you have some responsibility to the other players. They have some responsibility too, of course, they could choose a different expert to find the traps, and reward that person as deserved.



I want to clarify the point about "stealing from the party." He is not actually going through their stuff and stealing magical items from them. Instead, he is "double-dipping" from treasure. For example, if the party would get 3000 gp each from selling treasure, but there was a 2000 gp item he wanted to keep, he will keep the 2000 gp item, then write that he has 3000 gp (rather than the 1000 gp he should have).


Well, he isn't stealing from the party then (sounds like they are getting their share), he is stealing from you. And you are putting up with it. As long as you continue to permit that, he will continue to do it, because he is inherently dishonest. He's getting his private yayas by sneaking stuff by you. That is where he gets his enjoyment, it gives him a sense of superiority and accomplishment. It's pretty twisted.



I would be happy to do so, if I could get a copy of the class he is using. I don't have the book (and it's third party), so I need to get a copy of his class write-up. I asked him for it at our last game and he said he would scan it and e-mail it to me. (I offered to scan the pages while he was there and give the book back to him, but he said no.) If I get it, I will post his build, including class features. Our next game isn't until the 21st (because I'm out of town this weekend), so I may not see it until next week.


If I understand this correctly, he had the book there, and you had the ability to copy it, and he denied you? If I understand that correctly, then he isn't going to email it to you, I feel pretty certain of that. If he denied it to you, then he is definitely playing a power game with you, and a very dishonest one. If you cannot read up on this class he is supposedly playing, how can you ever keep him honest? You are the DM, the Dungeon Master. Adjudicating is your job, not his. To be a proper judge, you must have access to all applicable rules. And, you must know them.

You need to know what spells he has access to. You need to know which ones he has cast, and how many slots he has available. You should have this info for each player, and should cross them off as they are expended. How can you properly evaluate the relative strength of encounters if you don't have a clear picture of the resources available to the party?

You should know the average creature ADPR (average damage per round) vs each character in the party. If you know their hit points, you have an average feel for how many rounds they can last against a certain creature. You can figure out what average damage they do, and then you can tell who dies first in a fight, the players or the creature, and you can judge how close a fight is. You need to run these numbers from time to time, to keep a handle on balancing encounters. If players use smart tactics, so they gain extra advantages, then they can skew these numbers in their favor. Let them. Better yet, reward them for playing well, and they will be very happy with you.



Second and more important, I don't give XP. I'm holding the party level to the level of the dungeon and level them as they progress.


I think you should reconsider this. With this sort of rule, you have no way to motivate players to play well. A little competition is a good thing, and earning extra XP for role-playing well will dramatically improve the quality of your sessions. Let the players vote for who gets the bonuses.



S wants me to tell him that if he doesn't send me the class description, his character sheet, and his updated gear list before next game, he isn't welcome at game. I'm willing to let him bring everything to game for me to scan, but if he won't let me see his sheet, I don't want to let him play. (And I still feel bad for saying that.)


Why do you feel bad? He's a cheater. The more I read, the more convinced I am that it isn't incompetence, or even some kind of chip on his shoulder, he's just a bad apple. You are the DM. Running the game is your responsibility. You must have access to all the rules you allow in your game. You should never allow anything into your game you don't have full access to, how can you possibly adjudicate it?

Oh, and never, ever, let a player bully you. If you do, the player won't respect you, and the other players won't respect you, either.



I'm not sure how many he has. (He won't let me see his sheet.) I know at least one of the things he is doing is supposed to be a class feature (since it isn't a skill trick. I looked.)


Won't let you see his sheet????? Whose world is it, yours or his? You need to get this clear in your head. Then you need to make it clear to B. He seems to think it is his world, and he is in charge. All this without doing all the work between sessions that a DM needs to put in to be fully prepped. Just another form of cheating.

I can't say this strongly enough:

The DM has full access to everything on his world. Books, rules, maps, character sheets, spell lists, spells in memory, EVERYTHING.



One point of contention is that E, S, and P all RP and interact with the residents of the dungeon. B just wants to kill everything, and will get frustrated if an encounter gets resolved through dialogue.


Then why isn't he playing a fighter type??? Or a barbarian? Warblades rock.

[Quertus]

This works for you, and that's fine. But it wouldn't work for my game for two reasons. First, PCs die through no fault of the player. I don't run the kind of campaign where I kill a PC every game, but I make my combats challenging. Punishing a player because of their own actions is one thing. Punishing a player because the dice didn't like them one night is another. Second and more important, I don't give XP. I'm holding the party level to the level of the dungeon and level them as they progress.



One point of contention is that E, S, and P all RP and interact with the residents of the dungeon. B just wants to kill everything, and will get frustrated if an encounter gets resolved through dialogue.



I e-mailed E last night to get her take on the situation. However, I am very close to contacting him and telling him he isn't welcome here any more.

Posting this thread and reading everyone's comments has been very cathartic to me. It's given me a new perspective on the whole situation, and forced me to look back over everything he has done.

This whole situation is really new to me, which is surprising given that I have been gaming for about 10 years. (I got a late start.) I've had bad DMs (who I have walked away from), and played with bad players (who usually removed themselves from the games when they realized the DM wouldn't tolerate their behavior). But most of the players and groups I've gamed with have been amazing. This is my first experience with an incompetent, cheating player who refuses to learn or play by the rules. (Or sulks when forced to play by the rules.) That is a big part of why I am so hesitant to just kick him out - I can't believe that B really is as bad as he is. "There has to be something else going on. Maybe if I work with him enough, I can fix the problem and he'll become a good player." Stupid, I know.

As near as I can tell, players like B are the player counterpoint to narrative DMs. Just as narrative DMs will ignore rolls, HP, and the rules to tell their story, players like B seem to feel that the rules get in the way of their character being cool.

I don't know if you agree, or if that makes you want to kick him more or less. I personally generally dislike narrativist DMs, but don't mind nativist players as much. I don't usually care if the DM calls then on their behavior or not. Your group - and you - though, do care.

I don't know if narrativist players can be reformed. So I don't know if there's any point to keeping B around or not.

[Andorn]

As near as I can tell, players like B are the player counterpoint to narrative DMs. Just as narrative DMs will ignore rolls, HP, and the rules to tell their story, players like B seem to feel that the rules get in the way of their character being cool.

I don't know if you agree, or if that makes you want to kick him more or less. I personally generally dislike narrativist DMs, but don't mind nativist players as much. I don't usually care if the DM calls then on their behavior or not. Your group - and you - though, do care.

I don't know if narrativist players can be reformed. So I don't know if there's any point to keeping B around or not.

I have to respectfully disagree. The world and the storyline is the responsibility of the DM. I like activist players. In fact, the more active, or proactive, the better. Players who go out on their own and try stuff are a huge boon to a great game, they help the DM develop the world and create content, by doing interesting stuff.

But they have to follow the DM's rules. Period. If the player wants to make the rules, then they should be a DM, and see if they can earn the trust of enough players to run a campaign.

[Andorn]

It sounds like although you feel that way, you would also like to give the player one last chance.

If you do, it seems that you need to be very clear and explicit about the problems you are having, and how it affects the fun of the game for everyone. You seem to have been hoping he will come to understand some things, but hasn't, or refuses to make changes in his behavior and choices.

Perhaps he needs to be told even more explicitly, and clearly.


I'm convinced the player doesn't care about the other players or their enjoyment, or the DM or his enjoyment. People seem to often forget that the DM is a player too, and is just as entitled, if not more, to have fun also. After all, the DM does a lot more work than the players, generally.

It sounds to me like this player just gets off on the phantom sense of power, by cheating and getting away with it, and trying to control the DM.

[Hiro Quester]

S wants me to tell him that if he doesn't send me the class description, his character sheet, and his updated gear list before next game, he isn't welcome at game. I'm willing to let him bring everything to game for me to scan, but if he won't let me see his sheet, I don't want to let him play. (And I still feel bad for saying that.)

S is right. The DM should absolutely have each player's character sheet, gear list, and class description before each game. How else do you plan balanced, challenging, fun encounters?

If he is refusing to let you see his sheet, then he is trying to get away with stuff, and pulling a power play.

You absolutely do not have to put up with that. You should not let him play until he shows you the details.

It's admirable that you feel bad about this. Shows you are a nice person. But a DM is also there to set limits, and to manage the game for everyone.

People often say on this board when complaining about bad DMs that no D&D is better than bad D&D. That goes also for players. But even more so if a player is making it worse for the DM and other players. D&D without that player would be better.

I know you want to give him another chance. And perhaps you should (modulo what I said earlier about being clear about limits abpnd expectations).

But given your history of problems, perhaps it's time to say "enough!"

[Andorn]

I've been thinking about your game more than just your problem with this player, and it seems to me that you should let your players out of the dungeon. D&D is a social game, it's about a lot more than just killing monsters and getting loots. Players should be interacting with NPCs, building relationships, businesses, having more of an impact on the world.

You mentioned that your players couldn't handle multiple characters, or more sophisticated ones. Perhaps thy need more game time to assimilate their knowledge of their characters outside the dungeon. Using their character's abilities in different settings can help with that.

D&D is a role-playing game, not a war game with a dungeon theme. You win a war game by competing with the other players, and coming out on top. Your problem player is competing with YOU, and trying to come out on top. Since you are the DM and have the power of game law behind you, he does this by cheating, and withholding information on his character from you. His mentality is that of the rebel against authority, the criminal, the anti-society type. It is a very poisonous dynamic in an RPG.

I guess it is the difference between being a lawyer, where you are an advocate for a particular side, and being the judge, where you have to take many other things into account, like the rights of the other side, and the rule of law, which limits the power of the court itself. You need to become the fair and impartial adjudicator.

I see the same sort of mentality from some of the people on boards like this, the rules lawyers. They don't post to be helpful, it is all about winning. They have to be right, regardless of fun or common sense. That is where they get their satisfaction.

Your problem player gets his jollies by getting over on you and the other players. When encounters are resolved without combat, he gets no satisfaction. When he isn't the go-to guy finding traps, he gets no satisfaction. I'll bet if you took the campaign out of the dungeon, he'd feel pretty lost and unhappy. He has a major attitude problem. It may just be he doesn't "get" what a role-playing game is all about. Or, maybe he just doesn't care. If the problem turns out to be the latter, you must dump him.

A role-playing game is not about competition (although a bit of competition is human nature). An RPG is about story and accomplishment and character arc. The fun comes from events, not who wins over the other players. It's charades, not scrabble.

You can't have a story arc with no setting. A dungeon, by itself, isn't a setting. It has no relevance to anything greater, it's just a hole in the ground filled with traps, monsters, and loot. It doesn't mean anything, unless it has effects on the world around it. And your player's characters don't have any meaning, unless they are part of the larger world. PCs need to be relevant. The root of the word is to be related to other things. If the players have no relationship outside the dungeon, the game will always be shallow. Players have nowhere to grow, except in numbers on a piece of paper.

It might do your player good to play a leader type, in a broader campaign setting. You could try this:

Create a fighter-type NPC with the leadership feat. Then ask the problem player to help you out by running the character. Have him role-play acquiring cohorts and followers. This will empower the player by him having an effect on your world. He makes the rules for his followers and cohorts. It gives him something in game to be in charge of. He can't rebel against authority when he is the authority (in game).

Then ask him if he'd like to take the character over. Make the character central to a quest or something. Get him to retire his ninja (or offer a swap, the ninja becomes an NPC). Make him be responsible for the followers and cohorts. They need food and shelter. Horses. They need to get paid, or they abandon him. When the followers have disagreements (like over a woman, or someone in camp is stealing from other followers, or people get in a fight, or whatever) now he has to be judge, and administer discipline to his own troops. You can keep him as busy as you want just keeping the peace amongst his followers, and make him feel empowered.

[ATHATH]

You know that if you give him the Leadership Fighter, he's probably just going to try to get as many Rogue/Sorcerer companions as he can (to the exclusion of all other character roles/archetypes), right?

[Andorn]

Well, it is totally under the control of the DM, as to what classes of characters show up to become cohorts/followers. The matter should be role-played, of course.

[Kesnit]

(Though I do not an apparent shift in attitude toward locks and traps; if you don't like them you don't have to use them just because the module sez so, you know.)

I'm of two minds. On one hand, as I've said before, I don't like locks and traps in most situations. On the other hand, removing them after kicking the Rogue's player seems like I'm babying the rest of the party.


I agree with the in-game solution. The solution is let the traps cause the party all sorts of grief, instead of playing favorites to safeguard them.

Once people start getting hurt bad, losing items on blown saving throws, or even people dying, they will take traps seriously. Once they take traps seriously, they will take trapfinding and disarming seriously.

PCs have been seriously hurt and killed from missed traps.


Once they take finding/disarming traps seriously, they will seriously want someone who is competent. Then you offer them a choice: a well-designed (by you) NPC comes along and offers their services, for a full share of treasure (in direct competition to the troublesome PC).

This feels rather passive-aggressive. Granted, I've given B multiple opportunities to fix his PC and he hasn't taken them. There's also the issue that all the players except B know my feelings towards B and his PCs. (B probably suspects.) There is no possibility of the players realizing on their own the contrast between B and the NPC because they would know I set it up on purpose.


If the group opts to dump the problem character, you can gracefully offer the well-designed NPC to the player who is now lacking a character.

I've offered help and suggestions on improving his builds before. He always refuses to take my advice. I can't see him taking an entire NPC that I built.


That is easily solved. The group meets a paladin. The guy detects as evil to the paladin, regardless of what the character sheet says. Mayhem ensues.

LOL! I'd love to. It would be easy to do it since there are multiple places in the dungeon where Evil characters are treated differently from Good or Neutral. However, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work because I don't think B would accept the different treatment. His answer would be "my character sheet says I am True Neutral, so I am True Neutral." And there's not an easy way to cover up the fact he'd be treated differently from the rest of the party since E's Cleric is either LN or TN. (I don't remember which. She has let me see her sheet and is not trying to hide her alignment. I just don't remember it right now.) If B's character gets whacked (because I treat him as Evil) but E does not, he'll know I'm "disregarding his character sheet" and "forcing an alignment shift on him."

When the issue of B playing Evil first came up, I posted a thread here asking how I should handle the fact that he would not accept an alignment shift. (I did talk to him out of game about his in-character actions and why I considered them Evil. He told me his actions were not Evil, and could not be Evil, since he is Neutral.) The general opinion is that forcing alignment changes on PCs is a bad thing, and I can't say I disagree. In this case, I think it is completely justified, but I risk opening the door to B pointing out every Evil (or non-Good) action taken by the other PCs, as if to ask why I'm not forcing an alignment shift on anyone else.


I think you should utilize impartiality, and let the party/characters suffer actual consequences for the choices they make. Make sure to write down what traps and stuff do before hand.

It's a module, so everything is in the book.


There is an RPG named Burning Wheel, which has roleplaying goals built into the rule system. This could easily be adapted to D&D. Just have players write down the sort of stuff BW requires as part of a character. Then each session, award small, but significant, XP awards for roleplaying well. Have the group vote on who did the best job, who was the party workhorse, who used their class abilities best, who worked towards their goals best, etc. Rank the players 1, 2, 3. First place gets 50% of the award pool, 2nd place gets 33%, and 3rd place gets 17% of the session's RP XP award. If the players start getting material rewards for playing well, they will work at it more.

(1) I don't award XP. (2) I've been in nWoD games where XP can be awarded for really good RP. In games like that, where XP is in small increments and a little can go a long way, having a PC get a little extra XP doesn't hurt the rest of the party (especially when the RP XP eventually evens itself out over a series of sessions). I can't see how it would work well here, given that D&D is very straightforward - either a PC has enough XP for a level, or they don't. Most of the time, the extra XP wouldn't make a huge difference, since the PC would not have enough XP to level, regardless of how well (or not) the player RP-ed.


You're playing D&D with your Mother-In-Law??? I can't decide if you're insane, a saint, or the most guileful DM I've ever heard of. We're not worthy.

My wife and mother-in-law both found your comment amusing. My mother-in-law has been gaming for years - before I met my wife. She used to LARP with my wife.


Well, he isn't stealing from the party then (sounds like they are getting their share), he is stealing from you. And you are putting up with it. As long as you continue to permit that, he will continue to do it, because he is inherently dishonest.

I didn't know he was doing it until last game session. (I suspected, but wasn't sure until I saw his equipment list.)


If I understand this correctly, he had the book there, and you had the ability to copy it, and he denied you?

Yup. He had the book and my in-laws have a scanner on their computer. Probably would have taken about 5 minutes to scan the pages (since I would have to scan each page individually, rather than be able to feed them in). Wouldn't have even had to boot up the computer since my father-in-law was on the computer at the time.

I was incredulous.


If I understand that correctly, then he isn't going to email it to you, I feel pretty certain of that.

I'm almost certain he isn't, no.


If he denied it to you, then he is definitely playing a power game with you, and a very dishonest one. If you cannot read up on this class he is supposedly playing, how can you ever keep him honest?

I can't, and that's the point... :smallannoyed:


You are the DM, the Dungeon Master. Adjudicating is your job, not his. To be a proper judge, you must have access to all applicable rules. And, you must know them.

As I said, I've never been in a situation like this before. It never occurred to me that a player would act like this. (Even though I see posts about this like of behavior on the forums here, I never imagined it happening to me.)


You need to know what spells he has access to. You need to know which ones he has cast, and how many slots he has available.

I cannot remember the last time he cast a spell, and I had forgotten he even had casting for a while. (I think he did, too.)


Then why isn't he playing a fighter type??? Or a barbarian? Warblades rock.

Warblade is too complex for him. And he likes rogue-ish characters. That's all he ever plays.


I have to respectfully disagree. The world and the storyline is the responsibility of the DM. I like activist players. In fact, the more active, or proactive, the better. Players who go out on their own and try stuff are a huge boon to a great game, they help the DM develop the world and create content, by doing interesting stuff.

But they have to follow the DM's rules. Period. If the player wants to make the rules, then they should be a DM, and see if they can earn the trust of enough players to run a campaign.

I prefer players who will take plot hooks and run with them. There are times when I have to call a time-out to decide how the NPCs (or the world) will react to their actions, but I'd rather that than players just blindly following the trail of breadcrumbs I lay out for them.


If he is refusing to let you see his sheet, then he is trying to get away with stuff, and pulling a power play.

You absolutely do not have to put up with that. You should not let him play until he shows you the details.

If I don't hear from him before Thursday, I'll contact him and tell him to send me his sheets by Friday evening, or he isn't welcome Saturday evening.


I've been thinking about your game more than just your problem with this player, and it seems to me that you should let your players out of the dungeon. D&D is a social game, it's about a lot more than just killing monsters and getting loots. Players should be interacting with NPCs, building relationships, businesses, having more of an impact on the world.

I used to run an open-world, Skyrim based game with this group. (Minus E, but with the now-gone player, R.) I had some problems building encounters that could challenge the party without killing them, but was starting to get a balance down. So I decided to start a long-arching plot arc and provided the first plot hook to the PC. B's then-PC looked at my NPC and ask how much he was paying. Startled, I quoted a price, which B decided was too low and quoted a price that was too high. (The party at the time was well over WBL, thanks to my old PC, an Artificer.) I tried negotiation, but B refused to back down from his price and refused to go on the quest until I offered a price he would accept.

That's when I decided to switch to WLD. The idea of having to fight with him to progress any quest line made me want to give up the DM chair. (And I only had the chair because my wife, who had been running the game, decided she would rather play.)

That said, the party is putting their stamp on WLD. Rather than killing everything, they are doing everything they can to "fix" the dungeon and solve the problems in each section.


You can't have a story arc with no setting.

Each section of the dungeon has a story behind it. (A garrison of Celestials who have been trapped, and are in conflict with Inevitables. A minotaur tribe that has split and is in danger of splitting again - through the actions of a rakshasasa and a medusa. A band of goblins who have split because of a "new religion.") The party does use contacts from previous sections to get help as they progress.


Create a fighter-type NPC with the leadership feat. Then ask the problem player to help you out by running the character. Have him role-play acquiring cohorts and followers. This will empower the player by him having an effect on your world. He makes the rules for his followers and cohorts. It gives him something in game to be in charge of. He can't rebel against authority when he is the authority (in game).

Then ask him if he'd like to take the character over. Make the character central to a quest or something. Get him to retire his ninja (or offer a swap, the ninja becomes an NPC). Make him be responsible for the followers and cohorts. They need food and shelter. Horses. They need to get paid, or they abandon him. When the followers have disagreements (like over a woman, or someone in camp is stealing from other followers, or people get in a fight, or whatever) now he has to be judge, and administer discipline to his own troops. You can keep him as busy as you want just keeping the peace amongst his followers, and make him feel empowered.

All B wants to do is find traps and kill things. Having to be responsible for NPCs would require him to do something other than find traps and kill things. Also, he has enough problems following the rules with 1 PC. Why would you expect him to be able the follow the rules for his PC and all the NPCs?


You know that if you give him the Leadership Fighter, he's probably just going to try to get as many Rogue/Sorcerer companions as he can (to the exclusion of all other character roles/archetypes), right?

This, too.


Well, it is totally under the control of the DM, as to what classes of characters show up to become cohorts/followers. The matter should be role-played, of course.

Which defeats the purpose for two reasons. First, the only NPCs he would accept would be the Rogue/SORC. Second, he doesn't RP.

[Red Fel]

This feels rather passive-aggressive. Granted, I've given B multiple opportunities to fix his PC and he hasn't taken them. There's also the issue that all the players except B know my feelings towards B and his PCs. (B probably suspects.) There is no possibility of the players realizing on their own the contrast between B and the NPC because they would know I set it up on purpose.

Here's the bottom line, though. If the campaign is such that the party needs a dedicated trap-sniffer, and this guy refuses to play one and refuses to let anyone else play one, then your options are either (1) let them go without a dedicated trap-sniffer, and suffer, because it's required; (2) modify the campaign such that the lack of a dedicated trap-sniffer is no longer a requirement; or (3) provide an NPC trap-sniffer, which is effectively #2 in a different suit of clothes.

Those are your options. Stop second-guessing and pick one.


I've offered help and suggestions on improving his builds before. He always refuses to take my advice. I can't see him taking an entire NPC that I built.

Not his call to make.


LOL! I'd love to. It would be easy to do it since there are multiple places in the dungeon where Evil characters are treated differently from Good or Neutral. However, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work because I don't think B would accept the different treatment. His answer would be "my character sheet says I am True Neutral, so I am True Neutral." And there's not an easy way to cover up the fact he'd be treated differently from the rest of the party since E's Cleric is either LN or TN. (I don't remember which. She has let me see her sheet and is not trying to hide her alignment. I just don't remember it right now.) If B's character gets whacked (because I treat him as Evil) but E does not, he'll know I'm "disregarding his character sheet" and "forcing an alignment shift on him."

When the issue of B playing Evil first came up, I posted a thread here asking how I should handle the fact that he would not accept an alignment shift. (I did talk to him out of game about his in-character actions and why I considered them Evil. He told me his actions were not Evil, and could not be Evil, since he is Neutral.) The general opinion is that forcing alignment changes on PCs is a bad thing, and I can't say I disagree. In this case, I think it is completely justified, but I risk opening the door to B pointing out every Evil (or non-Good) action taken by the other PCs, as if to ask why I'm not forcing an alignment shift on anyone else.

Also not his call to make. Alignment shifts by the PCs are under the DM's control. They should be uncommon, but it's fair that if a PC behaves in a consistently Evil way, his alignment shifts to Evil. At that point, what his character sheet says doesn't matter. If he takes issue with his PC becoming Evil, the solution is for the PC to stop behaving in an Evil fashion. Full stop.

This is not a context in which you have to bend over backwards for the player. The context of alignment is specifically within the purview of the DM. Exercise your discretion. And again, stop second-guessing yourself.


It's a module, so everything is in the book.

Good. Then when there are consequences, he'll know exactly why they happened.


My wife and mother-in-law both found your comment amusing. My mother-in-law has been gaming for years - before I met my wife. She used to LARP with my wife.

Both your mother-in-law and your wife sound like awesome people. You are fortunate to have both.

You, on the other hand, are not impressing me with your convictions. You have given every reason to eject the problem player, and no real reason to keep him.

You say it's hard to find new players. This is demonstrably false - you keep describing E as the newest member of the group, so clearly you can recruit new people, albeit with some difficulty. You also say that E is still willing to give the problem player the benefit of the doubt - but let's face it, that's just you abdicating responsibility. You are the one who doesn't want to eject a bad player; don't blame E for this.


I didn't know he was doing it until last game session. (I suspected, but wasn't sure until I saw his equipment list.)

Kick him.


Yup. He had the book and my in-laws have a scanner on their computer. Probably would have taken about 5 minutes to scan the pages (since I would have to scan each page individually, rather than be able to feed them in). Wouldn't have even had to boot up the computer since my father-in-law was on the computer at the time.

I was incredulous.

Kick him.


I'm almost certain he isn't, no.

Kick him.


I can't, and that's the point... :smallannoyed:

Kick him.


As I said, I've never been in a situation like this before. It never occurred to me that a player would act like this. (Even though I see posts about this like of behavior on the forums here, I never imagined it happening to me.)

Dear Penthouse GitP Forum, I never imagined this would happen to me...


If I don't hear from him before Thursday, I'll contact him and tell him to send me his sheets by Friday evening, or he isn't welcome Saturday evening.

Finally!


That's when I decided to switch to WLD. The idea of having to fight with him to progress any quest line made me want to give up the DM chair. (And I only had the chair because my wife, who had been running the game, decided she would rather play.)

When a player's actions make you want to give up the DM chair - not exhaustion, not burn-out, not real-life conflicts, but a specific player and how deliberately difficult that person can be - there is an obvious solution.

I'm sure you can guess my response.


All B wants to do is find traps and kill things. Having to be responsible for NPCs would require him to do something other than find traps and kill things. Also, he has enough problems following the rules with 1 PC. Why would you expect him to be able the follow the rules for his PC and all the NPCs?

He can't follow the rules for his character. There's a solution.

Can you guess it? Can you?


Which defeats the purpose for two reasons. First, the only NPCs he would accept would be the Rogue/SORC. Second, he doesn't RP.

First, not his call to make; if he doesn't accept your NPCs, he doesn't have to accept the feat. Second, kick him.

I'm glad that you're finally getting around to considering kicking him. At this point, it seems long overdue. There's a lesson here, and it is this: The DM is ultimate arbiter.

You seemed reluctant to embrace that role. I understand that. The DM walks a fine line between exercising fair judgment and imposing fiat. But at the end of the day, the DM is a dictator. He may be benevolent or otherwise, but he is a dictator - his word is law. A DM unable to exercise his control of the game world, ideally in a manner beneficial to the game and players, isn't going to make for a fun game. Saying "Yes" is important, and great, but being able to say "No" when you really need to is an important skill.

This is one of those rare instances that really demanded a DM willing to say "No." I'm glad that you're rising to the task, and I hope that, in the future, you'll be more prepared to exercise that power sooner. (In an ideal world, you'll never have to, but in an ideal world, my forces would have already covered the world with my banner. We don't live in an ideal world.)

[Gildedragon]

Kesnit: Just dump this guy. You should have done that a while back, he sounds irredeemable. I hope, however, the experience gives you more tools, and clarifies the DMs role and power for you: you have access to everything and are the arbiter of all)(morality included)

[Kesnit]

I had a reply drafted, but after thinking about it some more, I realized my decision was already made. I was just too cowardly to admit it.


Here's the bottom line, though. If the campaign is such that the party needs a dedicated trap-sniffer, and this guy refuses to play one and refuses to let anyone else play one, then your options are either (1) let them go without a dedicated trap-sniffer, and suffer, because it's required; (2) modify the campaign such that the lack of a dedicated trap-sniffer is no longer a requirement; or (3) provide an NPC trap-sniffer, which is effectively #2 in a different suit of clothes.

Those are your options. Stop second-guessing and pick one.

B is gone. I'm tired of his antics and his cheating. As so many people have pointed out, the game has to be fun for me as well as the players. One comment I wrote in an e-mail to E was:


I don't like kicking players, but he is ruining my enjoyment of the game. (Game the nights he missed was a lot of fun. My first reaction when (my wife) said he would be back at game was '(mild curse word)!')

So...yeah...


Not his call to make.

Sorry, I think I skipped a mental step as I wrote. What I meant was "that's a good idea, and under almost any other circumstance would be a good one to try. However, I already know it won't work because he's already shown he won't listen to any build advice he is given."


Also not his call to make. Alignment shifts by the PCs are under the DM's control. They should be uncommon, but it's fair that if a PC behaves in a consistently Evil way, his alignment shifts to Evil.

I would have LOVED to shift his alignment. The only reason I didn't was when I discussed doing just that in these forums, I was told that was bad-wrong and a DM should never tell a player how to play a PC. So I let him keep calling himself True Neutral while continuing to carry out Evil acts.


At that point, what his character sheet says doesn't matter. If he takes issue with his PC becoming Evil, the solution is for the PC to stop behaving in an Evil fashion. Full stop.

If anyone knows Evil, it would be you. :smallbiggrin:


This is not a context in which you have to bend over backwards for the player. The context of alignment is specifically within the purview of the DM. Exercise your discretion. And again, stop second-guessing yourself.

His PC is Evil, and everyone at the table except him knows it. I would have HAPPILY had the dungeon treat him as Evil, but was told not to.


Both your mother-in-law and your wife sound like awesome people. You are fortunate to have both.

Yes, I am.


You, on the other hand, are not impressing me with your convictions. You have given every reason to eject the problem player, and no real reason to keep him.

Rebuke accepted.


You say it's hard to find new players. This is demonstrably false - you keep describing E as the newest member of the group, so clearly you can recruit new people, albeit with some difficulty.

We lucked into E. (My wife ran into E's mother in the gaming section of a used book store. E's mother asked my wife for advice on books for her daughter. My wife gave some recommendations - and passed on my contact information to give to E.) Our local gaming store closed a few months ago (the owner retired), and the other gaming stores in the area cater more towards CCG's than TTRPGs.

All of that said, there are ways to find new players. They all take time, but I do have ways to keep the party going without a 4th player. (Now where is that Rogue Handbook...)


You also say that E is still willing to give the problem player the benefit of the doubt - but let's face it, that's just you abdicating responsibility. You are the one who doesn't want to eject a bad player; don't blame E for this.

That isn't what I meant. I asked E for her opinion on B so I would know whether or not all my players were in favor of kicking him. (Without E, the players in favor of kicking him are my wife and mother-in-law, neither of whom are impartial.) I did get an e-mail from E over the weekend and she said she will support me if I kick B.


Dear Penthouse GitP Forum, I never imagined this would happen to me...

LOL. Except the letters to Penthouse are usually about GOOD things!


Finally!

Thank you (I think.)


When a player's actions make you want to give up the DM chair - not exhaustion, not burn-out, not real-life conflicts, but a specific player and how deliberately difficult that person can be - there is an obvious solution.

I'm sure you can guess my response.

Yeah, you've made yourself quite clear. I really do like running games, but dealing with B every week has been taking it out of me. My reaction every time he showed up was a sinking heart, quickly hidden by a smile. I knew he was the cause, but just could not bring myself to take the necessary step and boot him.


He can't follow the rules for his character. There's a solution.

I wasn't defending him with my comment. I was addressing the poster who said to give him lots of NPCs to play with.


First, not his call to make; if he doesn't accept your NPCs, he doesn't have to accept the feat.

I had no intention of giving him the feat.


I'm glad that you're finally getting around to considering kicking him. At this point, it seems long overdue.

It is. I don't have his contact information, so can't message him until I get home, but my decision is made.


You seemed reluctant to embrace that role. I understand that. The DM walks a fine line between exercising fair judgment and imposing fiat. But at the end of the day, the DM is a dictator. He may be benevolent or otherwise, but he is a dictator - his word is law. A DM unable to exercise his control of the game world, ideally in a manner beneficial to the game and players, isn't going to make for a fun game. Saying "Yes" is important, and great, but being able to say "No" when you really need to is an important skill.

You may not have meant it this way, but this paragraph really hit me. Putting it that way was what made me finally snap out of my self-imposed cowardness and wake up to what needs to be done. I've told B "No" on more than one occasion, but every time I have, he's sulked and tried to argue with me. That should have been a clue, but it wasn't.


This is one of those rare instances that really demanded a DM willing to say "No." I'm glad that you're rising to the task, and I hope that, in the future, you'll be more prepared to exercise that power sooner.

The first step to the dark side is always the hardest. :smallbiggrin:


Kesnit: Just dump this guy. You should have done that a while back, he sounds irredeemable. I hope, however, the experience gives you more tools, and clarifies the DMs role and power for you: you have access to everything and are the arbiter of all)(morality included)

And I need to be more forceful with my players.




So, uh, anyone want to join a game? I know of one with an opening for skill-monkey. (Or arcane caster. That role is currently being filled by my wife, but she likes playing skill-monkeys, too!) :smallbiggrin:

[Gildedragon]

Re: New Skill Monkey

Seriously: fuse skills (listen + spot; DD + Open Lock; Spellcraft + Psicraft + UMD + UPD; hide + move silently; Speak Language + Decipher Script) that will free up your players' skills to take other skills, fill out the abilities the party has: someone searches, someone else disables, someone preps alchemical stuff to sneak around...
Use complex (multi check) locks, and encounter traps... Yes a skill monkey is very handy, but give allowing people to collectively fill the role a chance. And if you find a skillmonkey later: the fused skills will make them more effective

[Red Fel]

B is gone. I'm tired of his antics and his cheating. As so many people have pointed out, the game has to be fun for me as well as the players.

I know you don't need my approval, nor should you, but I'm proud of you. Saying "No" to players is hard; the final "No" is that much harder. Nobody would say that what you're doing is easy, but you're definitely doing right by your table.


If anyone knows Evil, it would be you. :smallbiggrin:

And don't you forget it. :smallamused:


Thank you (I think.)

*SNIP*

You may not have meant it this way, but this paragraph really hit me. Putting it that way was what made me finally snap out of my self-imposed cowardness and wake up to what needs to be done. I've told B "No" on more than one occasion, but every time I have, he's sulked and tried to argue with me. That should have been a clue, but it wasn't.

For what it's worth, it came from what in me passes for a good place. I meant it to sting, a bit, but mostly to motivate. DMing is hard - anyone who says otherwise has never done it - and one of the hardest things is restraining your use of arbitrary and unlimited power, while still applying it as needed. There's always room to grow, is the point, and one of the best things you can do right now is treat this as a growth experience.

You had your instincts about this guy. Deep down, you knew there were problems. You knew even before you started this thread (or the others). But you tried, admirably, to make it work. Now, you move forward, learn what you can from what happened, and if this sort of thing happens again - which it hopefully won't - you know better how to listen to your instincts.


The first step to the dark side is always the hardest. :smallbiggrin:

And don't you forget it. :smallamused:

[Andorn]

PCs have been seriously hurt and killed from missed traps.

This feels rather passive-aggressive. Granted, I've given B multiple opportunities to fix his PC and he hasn't taken them. There's also the issue that all the players except B know my feelings towards B and his PCs. (B probably suspects.) There is no possibility of the players realizing on their own the contrast between B and the NPC because they would know I set it up on purpose.

I've offered help and suggestions on improving his builds before. He always refuses to take my advice. I can't see him taking an entire NPC that I built.


As I have said, YOU are the DM. You are not an advocate, you are the law. Treat your own dungeon with some respect, it's not there just to be plundered. Stop rolling over for this guy. Offer the rest of the party an alternative, a competent skill monkey. Allow the party to make a decision in its own best interest, and support their decision. You have to get Darwinian on this guy, or he will never respect you or the other players. It is your RESPONSIBILITY to make him do so, for everybody else's enjoyment.



LOL! I'd love to. It would be easy to do it since there are multiple places in the dungeon where Evil characters are treated differently from Good or Neutral. However, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work because I don't think B would accept the different treatment. His answer would be "my character sheet says I am True Neutral, so I am True Neutral." And there's not an easy way to cover up the fact he'd be treated differently from the rest of the party since E's Cleric is either LN or TN. (I don't remember which. She has let me see her sheet and is not trying to hide her alignment. I just don't remember it right now.) If B's character gets whacked (because I treat him as Evil) but E does not, he'll know I'm "disregarding his character sheet" and "forcing an alignment shift on him."


If B doesn't accept it, B can leave. You are the rulemaker, not B. What happens in game is entirely on your authority. If B's character behaves consistently evil, and his character sheet says "Neutral" then B is lying on his character sheet, and you should refuse to accept it.



When the issue of B playing Evil first came up, I posted a thread here asking how I should handle the fact that he would not accept an alignment shift. (I did talk to him out of game about his in-character actions and why I considered them Evil. He told me his actions were not Evil, and could not be Evil, since he is Neutral.) The general opinion is that forcing alignment changes on PCs is a bad thing, and I can't say I disagree. In this case, I think it is completely justified, but I risk opening the door to B pointing out every Evil (or non-Good) action taken by the other PCs, as if to ask why I'm not forcing an alignment shift on anyone else.


Stop allowing B to argue. Rule. Make it stick. B's "logic" is baloney. It is just an assertion, not an argument. He can assert all he wants, your judgement is final.

DMs make rules. Repeat after me, "That is how it works on my world. On my world, stealing from the party is an evil act. Adding equipment to your character sheet under false pretenses is an evil act. In my judgement your character is evil. I have ruled. Change the character sheet to reflect the truth of how you play the character, or leave."



(1) I don't award XP. (2) I've been in nWoD games where XP can be awarded for really good RP. In games like that, where XP is in small increments and a little can go a long way, having a PC get a little extra XP doesn't hurt the rest of the party (especially when the RP XP eventually evens itself out over a series of sessions). I can't see how it would work well here, given that D&D is very straightforward - either a PC has enough XP for a level, or they don't. Most of the time, the extra XP wouldn't make a huge difference, since the PC would not have enough XP to level, regardless of how well (or not) the player RP-ed.


Start awarding XP. Give significant XP for playing a character well, somewhere in the amount of 1/2 of an equal level CR per session to the best player. Your players will get the message and start taking you seriously.



My wife and mother-in-law both found your comment amusing. My mother-in-law has been gaming for years - before I met my wife. She used to LARP with my wife.


You are a lucky man.



I didn't know he was doing it until last game session. (I suspected, but wasn't sure until I saw his equipment list.)


You need an uncompromising change to your policy: after every session you keep fair copies of everybody's character sheets. Justify this to your players with the following two points:

1) access to character sheets helps you judge the strength of the party when you are balancing the strength of encounters and the amount of loot handed out.

2) if the group is stuck in the dungeon and someone can't show up for a session, you need the sheet to tell what happens to the character when the group encounters something.

Of course, the third reason is to keep your players honest. You need to know their characters better than they do, it is part of the prep work you have to do as a DM.



As I said, I've never been in a situation like this before. It never occurred to me that a player would act like this. (Even though I see posts about this like of behavior on the forums here, I never imagined it happening to me.)


Honestly, that's a bit naive of you. People in the real world do bad things. D&D players are real people. Some of them do bad things, too. As I said before, he "wins" by getting over on you, that is what this is about. It is your game, you make the rules. He either respects you (which you must insist on and enforce if necessary) or he gets booted.



I cannot remember the last time he cast a spell, and I had forgotten he even had casting for a while. (I think he did, too.)


Well, if his character is a spellcaster but isn't using his abilities, then he isn't getting any XP bonuses, unless the other players are worse.



Warblade is too complex for him. And he likes rogue-ish characters. That's all he ever plays.


Rogues can be more complicated than warblades. Warblades, it's: pick some maneuvers, bash things and use the maneuvers. Rogues have to be active all the time, looking for hazards and keeping the party safe.



If I don't hear from him before Thursday, I'll contact him and tell him to send me his sheets by Friday evening, or he isn't welcome Saturday evening.


Good, but I see in another post you kicked him. So, is that final, or a warning?



I used to run an open-world, Skyrim based game with this group. (Minus E, but with the now-gone player, R.) I had some problems building encounters that could challenge the party without killing them, but was starting to get a balance down. So I decided to start a long-arching plot arc and provided the first plot hook to the PC. B's then-PC looked at my NPC and ask how much he was paying. Startled, I quoted a price, which B decided was too low and quoted a price that was too high. (The party at the time was well over WBL, thanks to my old PC, an Artificer.) I tried negotiation, but B refused to back down from his price and refused to go on the quest until I offered a price he would accept.

That's when I decided to switch to WLD. The idea of having to fight with him to progress any quest line made me want to give up the DM chair. (And I only had the chair because my wife, who had been running the game, decided she would rather play.)

That said, the party is putting their stamp on WLD. Rather than killing everything, they are doing everything they can to "fix" the dungeon and solve the problems in each section.


Well, if a player decides that the apparent reward for a mission is too low, they can turn it down. Involve them in something else. Or, just let them flounder around and get nothing done for a session or two, maybe they will decide it is worth going after all.

Each section of the dungeon has a story behind it. (A garrison of Celestials who have been trapped, and are in conflict with Inevitables. A minotaur tribe that has split and is in danger of splitting again - through the actions of a rakshasasa and a medusa. A band of goblins who have split because of a "new religion.") The party does use contacts from previous sections to get help as they progress.
[/quote]

But what is the exterior context of the dungeon? After all, worlds are lots more than dungeons. Maybe something in the dungeon requires the players to go find a sage in a city to figure out a puzzle, or get a magic item they need for a particular encounter.



All B wants to do is find traps and kill things. Having to be responsible for NPCs would require him to do something other than find traps and kill things. Also, he has enough problems following the rules with 1 PC. Why would you expect him to be able the follow the rules for his PC and all the NPCs?


My thinking was to provide a different way for him to feel powerful, one that doesn't involve him cheating.

[Andorn]

I would have LOVED to shift his alignment. The only reason I didn't was when I discussed doing just that in these forums, I was told that was bad-wrong and a DM should never tell a player how to play a PC. So I let him keep calling himself True Neutral while continuing to carry out Evil acts.


Huh, that's kinda hard to imagine. Can you link the thread, I'd like to read what you said and what the reply was. Either the responder didn't understand the problem, or they were just clueless.



His PC is Evil, and everyone at the table except him knows it. I would have HAPPILY had the dungeon treat him as Evil, but was told not to.


You are the DM. It is your decision, not anybody else's on this forum (or any other). People can give advice, but it is up to you to decide which is good and which is bad.



We lucked into E. (My wife ran into E's mother in the gaming section of a used book store. E's mother asked my wife for advice on books for her daughter. My wife gave some recommendations - and passed on my contact information to give to E.) Our local gaming store closed a few months ago (the owner retired), and the other gaming stores in the area cater more towards CCG's than TTRPGs.

All of that said, there are ways to find new players. They all take time, but I do have ways to keep the party going without a 4th player. (Now where is that Rogue Handbook...)


Post your phone number or email at local gaming stores. Interview prospective players to weed out the losers before letting them into your house, though. Long ago I had a player actually steal from me. Older but wiser.



You may not have meant it this way, but this paragraph really hit me. Putting it that way was what made me finally snap out of my self-imposed cowardness and wake up to what needs to be done. I've told B "No" on more than one occasion, but every time I have, he's sulked and tried to argue with me. That should have been a clue, but it wasn't.


His behavior is telling. His goal isn't to play the game well, his goal is to dictate to others how the game is played, and to get his way.



So, uh, anyone want to join a game? I know of one with an opening for skill-monkey. (Or arcane caster. That role is currently being filled by my wife, but she likes playing skill-monkeys, too!) :smallbiggrin:

Errr, how would that work? Play by email?

[Sword-Geass]

I would have LOVED to shift his alignment. The only reason I didn't was when I discussed doing just that in these forums, I was told that was bad-wrong and a DM should never tell a player how to play a PC. So I let him keep calling himself True Neutral while continuing to carry out Evil acts.

Obviously the thread is more or less over now that you kicked him (you did, did you? :smallconfused:), but for future reference I would like to point you a little rule for RP: "my character doesn't value his word and acts acording to it because he is lawful, but my character is lawful because he values his word and acts acording to it".
That's to say, you play it evil, then the sheat say's so. Not the other way around. Changing his aligment would have been perfectly fine.

Also, congratulations on getting rid of a problem. And if you want to try to fill that vacant you should post here (on the internet) that there's a 3.5 table open for anyone who wants to join. That's how I conformed my first and actual group a few months ago.

[Efrate]

Also Skype. Have someone skype in and they can play along with people. I've done that before when a friend had moved and we were just about to finish up a campaign. Its a bit jarring but can work.

As far as the dungeon goes for whomever was asking, the point of world's largest is once you are in, you cannot get it until its done. Its a massive dungeon crawl, and its effects on the world are what lead you to it, but once you go in you must go through before you can go out. Its inherent in the design. It is supposed to be largely unforgiving, brutal, and a grind. Also because of the number of encounters, all of your leveling is done by benchmark because you will hit easily 40-60 cr appropriate encounters in the first section alone not counting traps. There are 20 sections IIRC each with over 100 keyed areas. The 13.33 rule would mean you either spend most your time with no XP gained or you leapfrog past everything and it falls apart. I think its potentially a great dungeon for early players who might not be the most comfortable with a lot of npc non-combative interaction. It will either make you into a good adventurer or eat you alive, or possibly both.

There is a lot of story relevance regardless. The first section for example, has a three way war between orcs, kobalds, and trogolodytes I think? You can choose to work with one or the other, murder hobo your way through all of them, play multiple sides against one another, or get aid from goblins or other denizens from other areas for looting rights/whatever you can all agree too.

[Kesnit]

Start awarding XP. Give significant XP for playing a character well, somewhere in the amount of 1/2 of an equal level CR per session to the best player. Your players will get the message and start taking you seriously.

Awarding extra XP really doesn't do anything in D&D. Either a PC has enough for the next level, or they don't. There is no middle ground. Also, there are so many encounters that awarding XP would cause the party to far outlevel the area of the dungeon where they are. I'm already having to level-up encounters a little to make up for the fact WLD assumes the PCs only have gear drops from the dungeon, so monsters are horribly underleveled.


You need an uncompromising change to your policy: after every session you keep fair copies of everybody's character sheets. Justify this to your players with the following two points:

My remaining players have given me their sheets.


Honestly, that's a bit naive of you.

Yup. But in my defense, I've been gaming with several groups for over 10 years and this is the first time I've had an actual cheater. Bad players and bad DMs, sure. Actual cheating, no.


Well, if his character is a spellcaster but isn't using his abilities, then he isn't getting any XP bonuses, unless the other players are worse.

XP bonuses? Huh?


Good, but I see in another post you kicked him. So, is that final, or a warning?

It was final.


Well, if a player decides that the apparent reward for a mission is too low, they can turn it down. Involve them in something else. Or, just let them flounder around and get nothing done for a session or two, maybe they will decide it is worth going after all.

So punish the rest of the players for one player's actions? This entire thread has been people telling me not to let him get away with that.


But what is the exterior context of the dungeon?

In the module, there isn't one. That's the point of WLD - the party is trapped in the dungeon (progressing section by section) until they find an exit.


Huh, that's kinda hard to imagine. Can you link the thread, I'd like to read what you said and what the reply was. Either the responder didn't understand the problem, or they were just clueless.

Here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?440179-Troublesome-Player&p=19799271&highlight=alignment#post19799271) it is. The context was that the player in question put on a cursed ring that required him to act LG. (I didn't put the ring in the module and he put the unidentified ring on.) Rereading the thread, I see I misremembered the conversation. It wasn't "forcing alignment change is bad." It was "forcing him to play another alignment is bad."


Post your phone number or email at local gaming stores. Interview prospective players to weed out the losers before letting them into your house, though. Long ago I had a player actually steal from me. Older but wiser.

There are ways to find new players, I know. They just take time, but we can do it.


Errr, how would that work? Play by email?

I was trying to make a joke. :smallredface:


Obviously the thread is more or less over now that you kicked him (you did, did you? :smallconfused:),

Yes, I did. Last night was the firs game session without him.

It was...refreshing. The remaining party found a mini-boss before they found their new Rogue, so had a rather challenging combat. (The Warlock fell unconscious and only survived because of a Heal check from the Cleric. The Fighter/BARB got down to 1 HP at one point.) Combat went very smoothly since everyone knew their abilities and there was no arguing over whether something could be done. When the dice behaved, the new Rogue found the traps that B would have had no chance on and the party managed to make some progress on the story of this section of the dungeon. A good time was had by all.


Also Skype. Have someone skype in and they can play along with people. I've done that before when a friend had moved and we were just about to finish up a campaign. Its a bit jarring but can work.

Doable, but it would be hard for the Skype player to see the gaming mat and the map of the dungeon.

[Andorn]

Awarding extra XP really doesn't do anything in D&D. Either a PC has enough for the next level, or they don't. There is no middle ground. Also, there are so many encounters that awarding XP would cause the party to far outlevel the area of the dungeon where they are. I'm already having to level-up encounters a little to make up for the fact WLD assumes the PCs only have gear drops from the dungeon, so monsters are horribly underleveled.


A) Well, if you just give players levels as the dungeon goes up, then no, XP doesn't do anything. If players earn XP, then it does.

If the party level rises above the encounter level, then XP awards for the same type of encounters will go down. Let the party worry about what to do about that, it isn't your concern. Stop identifying with the party.

You can always decide that some of the monsters have different loot than listed. In particular, maybe they have artwork that is too heavy or bulky for the party to move easily. So maybe they opt to leave some stuff behind. Or maybe they need carts and horses and winches to move it. Let them figure it out, it's not your job. If they opt to go to town and buy equipment to move the stuff, they'll have to interact with the world. You'll have to build some actual world, instead of just DMing what is written in the WLD book. Once the party gets the artwork to town, how do they sell it? How do they keep it safe from thieves? Let the party figure it out, that's their job. Your job is to throw a wide range of challenges at them, to add depth to your game.

USE YOUR IMAGINATION.

There is plenty of middle ground with XP. What about spells with XP costs? What about item crafting? Did you know there are spells/feats that allow sharing of the XP cost for crafting? So, if the fighter in the groups wants the wizard to make a magic sword, the wizard can require the fighter to pay the XP cost, so the wizard doesn't fall behind the party in XP.

If you just hand out levels, then an entire dimension to the game becomes meaningless. Mechanically, you are forcing the party to always be what you judge to be the appropriate level, and keeping them identical in level. Life isn't like that. What will you do if a new player joins? Make them the same level? Will that player know the full range of abilities of that character as well as if they had grown into it over many sessions of play?



XP bonuses? Huh?


The bonuses for good roleplaying, which will encourage your players to enrich the RP experience of the game.



So punish the rest of the players for one player's actions? This entire thread has been people telling me not to let him get away with that.


It isn't punishment. Let the other players go to the dungeon or on the adventure if they choose. Stop making the choices for the party, let them decide what they are going to do. Your job is to offer choices, and then adjudicate the results of those choices.



In the module, there isn't one. That's the point of WLD - the party is trapped in the dungeon (progressing section by section) until they find an exit.


Huh. With no exits, the air would get really stale. What does the party do with their loot, they can only carry so much. Are they using magic to make food? Where do casters get their material spell components? Where do they get training? When someone gains a feat, where do they learn the skills?



The context was that the player in question put on a cursed ring that required him to act LG. (I didn't put the ring in the module and he put the unidentified ring on.) Rereading the thread, I see I misremembered the conversation. It wasn't "forcing alignment change is bad." It was "forcing him to play another alignment is bad."


In first edition, changing alignment was serious, you lost a level. They removed that penalty in 3rd ed, which I think was a mistake. Now, only classes dependent on alignment (like paladin, cleric, monk, a few others) are alignment-dependent. If they violate their alignment, they lose class abilities until they atone. You could stick a negative level in there, which remains until a character earns a level.

[LTwerewolf]

A)
Huh. With no exits, the air would get really stale. What does the party do with their loot, they can only carry so much. Are they using magic to make food? Where do casters get their material spell components? Where do they get training? When someone gains a feat, where do they learn the skills?[quote]

Look up world's largest dungeon. Most of these are answered.

[quote]In first edition, changing alignment was serious, you lost a level. They removed that penalty in 3rd ed, which I think was a mistake. Now, only classes dependent on alignment (like paladin, cleric, monk, a few others) are alignment-dependent. If they violate their alignment, they lose class abilities until they atone. You could stick a negative level in there, which remains until a character earns a level.

I thought that was one of the dumbest things about first edition. Changing your mind about life means losing levels? Your dm disagreeing with what you happened to put on the paper even though their personality hasn't changed one bit means losing a level? No thank you. I'd rather an alignment system which is descriptive rather than prescriptive. Alignment describes who you are, it doesn't make the decision for you. I can't tell you how many times I've seen or heard "well I'm chaotic neutral, so I do this" or "Well normally my character would do this, but I'm lawful good so I do this instead." It was a giant flaw in the system and I'm glad it's mostly gone.

[Andorn]

[QUOTE=Andorn;20806423]A)
Huh. With no exits, the air would get really stale. What does the party do with their loot, they can only carry so much. Are they using magic to make food? Where do casters get their material spell components? Where do they get training? When someone gains a feat, where do they learn the skills?[quote]

Look up world's largest dungeon. Most of these are answered.


Eh, I don't have $150 to spend just to check up on something like that.




I thought that was one of the dumbest things about first edition. Changing your mind about life means losing levels? Your dm disagreeing with what you happened to put on the paper even though their personality hasn't changed one bit means losing a level? No thank you. I'd rather an alignment system which is descriptive rather than prescriptive. Alignment describes who you are, it doesn't make the decision for you. I can't tell you how many times I've seen or heard "well I'm chaotic neutral, so I do this" or "Well normally my character would do this, but I'm lawful good so I do this instead." It was a giant flaw in the system and I'm glad it's mostly gone.

For alignment to work correctly, it must first be accurately expressed, on the character sheet. If the player is behaving like CE, but has LN on the sheet, that must be addressed by the DM. What is written on the sheet is shorthand for the DM to use when it comes to spells like know alignment. If it is inaccurate, then the spell isn't going to work right in game. The DM has every right to insist that what the player puts down is accurate.

NPCs who don't know the character and their history, but want to use divinations about the character's nature use such spells. It makes a difference when the party encounters certain NPCs. It also greatly matters when it comes to what classes the character qualifies for. The DM decides what the different alignments mean in his/her game, and is well within their rights to insist on correctness.

Alignment is a deeply-seated formative belief system. Making a permanent change to it is difficult, for anybody. People often spend years in therapy dealing with major shifts in their personal outlook. It is often psychologically traumatic. A single level loss isn't that significant compared to other effects that such shocks can have on a person. People change jobs, or drop out of the world. They get divorced, change their orientation, or get addicted to drugs or alcohol. The litany of mental problems people deal with is nearly endless. Saying someone just "changed their mind" seriously trivializes what some people go through.

Of course, if as a player you want total freedom to make such changes whenever the whim strikes you, then you might argue that it is a bad rule.

[Fizban]

Doable, but it would be hard for the Skype player to see the gaming mat and the map of the dungeon.
Webcams. Do a video chat, have a camera pointed at the board. Might be able to get multiple streams going (laptop and desktop) so there can be one facing the faces as well, and of course having their face on a screen makes it a lot easier to tell when they're about to speak and all those other facial cues.

[Sian]

I would have LOVED to shift his alignment. The only reason I didn't was when I discussed doing just that in these forums, I was told that was bad-wrong and a DM should never tell a player how to play a PC. So I let him keep calling himself True Neutral while continuing to carry out Evil acts.

"Sure, you think you're Neutral, but you're only fooling yourself, everyone else can see it as clear as day. What you believe you are, aren't the same thing as others (including omnipotent beings such as Deties) see you being. And behind your back those admitting themselves to be evil laugh at you for your fake beliefs, while the Blood War got another reason for trying to see who'll be able to use your willful ignorance the best"

---

Also, something I've had good experiences with is singling out the most competent player in the group, and letting them run the NPCs when it comes to combat. It stops the DM from having to play chess with both colors so to speak, and keeps your tactical choices in terms of combat (more) honest, while at the same time having to juggle fewer balls making it possible to make the encounters either that slight bit more complex or a bit faster since you don't have to figure out what MauveShirt#06 do in response to Mook#402-405 and Boss#27