PDA

View Full Version : One of my players just doesn't understand what a character is



Arm of God
2017-08-04, 02:59 AM
I am running a 50% combat 50% Roleplay D&D 5e campaign soon and all of my players are rpg vetrens. All of the characters are set except for one... One of my players is infamous for powergaming and I discovered why; he doesn't understand what creates a convincing character. All of his characters I've ever seen him play have always been the same little Mary Sue murder robot and all they ever seem to care about is being the best at everything.

When I ask him what his character's motivations are, he doesn't know. When I ask him how his backstory affects him, he doesn't know. When I ask him what flaws his character has, he asks me "Flaws?" All he wants to be is good at combat and I'm afraid he'll just get bored and try to cause chaos whenever we're in a roleplay situation, as he tends to do. Should I let him down easy or try to carry him through the campaign?

--Details for those who may be interested--

This character he's been making is a barbarian that has been inspired by Saxton Hale from TF2. He likes to brawl and wrestle opponents, and he can do that well, but oitside of that his character has a work-in-progress backstory and no motivation. We've gone over concepts like making his character a successful businessman that left his fortunes behind for his passion of wrestling to him being of a noble bloodline that has descended from the war God Tempus, but these ideas haven't stuck.

goto124
2017-08-04, 03:08 AM
I'm afraid he'll just get bored and try to cause chaos whenever we're in a roleplay situation, as he tends to do.

How did he cause chaos in roleplay situations, in this campaign or a different one? I'm trying to figure out how the chaos manifests itself.

Arm of God
2017-08-04, 03:15 AM
This campaign doesn't start until a week from today. In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character." It just turns a calm roleplaying session into GTA.

Arm of God
2017-08-04, 03:18 AM
I get that some people like combat more and get a thrill from that "Roll for initiative," but I feel like he'd have more fun roleplaying if he'd create a character that actually has depth and isn't just a Mary Sue.

AnBe
2017-08-04, 03:50 AM
I have a similar player problem. He likes to create characters that are good at everything, powergaming, etc. He isn't all about combat like your player, but he can be difficult to work with at times. He's my best friend, but not the best roleplayer in the world. That's okay.
His characters do tend to have motivations, though they are always over the top ridiculous, which can be fun depending on the setting.
I would just keep throwing character backstory and motivation ideas at him until something sticks. It would be cool to have your player make a character that fits into your world in a meaningful way, instead of just "Me Krusk, Me Smash You"

HidesHisEyes
2017-08-04, 04:30 AM
My advice, for what it's worth:

- When you say, 50% combat and 50% roleplaying, do you mean on a session by session basis? I.e. each session is roughly 50/50. I'd advise that you aim for that. I'm very into the roleplaying side of things but if I'm playing a four-hour session of D&D then I want at least a couple of fights, since combat is a big part of D&D.

- Let him play a character whose whole thing is "I love fighting" if that's what he really wants. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that kind of character...

- ... but be very clear with him that there will be interaction and other types of scenes as well as combat, that the other players enjoy that stuff, and crucially that using "it's what my character would do" as an excuse to spoil their fun with random acts of violence isn't fair, since D&D is a team game and a social activity.

- If it doesn't work out it doesn't work out, and you might just have to say "this is the style of game we're playing, maybe you can find a different group that prefers a more hacknslash style. Just avoid coming across like you're making a value judgement on his preferences, since there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to play the old-school dungeon-crawl-monster-bash-treasure-grab style of D&D. It's just not the kind of game you're running.

I hope you manage to sort it out.

ShedShadow
2017-08-04, 04:39 AM
I get your problem: have a player like that myself. One of the ways I tried to cope with it was by having in-game obstacles that need to be overcome by roleplaying. For example: I had a minidungeon where every PC had chance to prove themselves worthy of obtaining treasure from a powerful wizard. The 1st challenge was fighting a statue, 2nd was beating me at a game of chess (I had no pawns), third was a roleplaying obstacle and fourth a riddle. The roleplaying obstacle was a statue with 3 cards in front of him and each contained a depiction of one of the character's happiest memories. I really just let every PC pass with the first 3 things that I deemed fitting as DM, but it makes them really think about their character and being rewarded by progression towards loot (PC in case received a ring of invisibility so he was rewarded quite well for a lvl 6 char). I am sure you can think of other ideas to help your buddy.

oxybe
2017-08-04, 04:55 AM
My advice, for what it's worth:

- When you say, 50% combat and 50% roleplaying, do you mean on a session by session basis? I.e. each session is roughly 50/50. I'd advise that you aim for that. I'm very into the roleplaying side of things but if I'm playing a four-hour session of D&D then I want at least a couple of fights, since combat is a big part of D&D.

- Let him play a character whose whole thing is "I love fighting" if that's what he really wants. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that kind of character...

- ... but be very clear with him that there will be interaction and other types of scenes as well as combat, that the other players enjoy that stuff, and crucially that using "it's what my character would do" as an excuse to spoil their fun with random acts of violence isn't fair, since D&D is a team game and a social activity.

- If it doesn't work out it doesn't work out, and you might just have to say "this is the style of game we're playing, maybe you can find a different group that prefers a more hacknslash style. Just avoid coming across like you're making a value judgement on his preferences, since there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to play the old-school dungeon-crawl-monster-bash-treasure-grab style of D&D. It's just not the kind of game you're running.

I hope you manage to sort it out.

This. 100% this. I was going to post something similar, but you gone and done it for me.

Pex
2017-08-04, 07:43 AM
Have his character be the bodyguard of another player's character, a player you trust won't abuse the position. His job is to fight. He's to be an intimidating presence when there is no fighting to prevent others from starting fights against the one he is guarding. He's the mook you see all the time around the BBEG in movies and tv shows.

The guarded player can give him orders of when to fight and when not to fight. To help teach roleplaying the guarded player can from time to time ask the bodyguard his opinion on the matter at hand for something other than he wants to smash. If the bodyguard voluntarily offers an opinion that's not about fighting that's a good sign. Unless it's too obvious a stupid thing, the guarded player should go with his idea from time to time. With your role as DM, let his idea work from time to time as well.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-04, 09:34 AM
I mean, if they sound like they're going to be disruptive and not a good fit for this campaign, maybe don't game with them?

Mastikator
2017-08-04, 10:23 AM
Give roleplaying experience to the players. That will give him an incentive he can understand to learn to roleplay, since he's a power gamer he'll try to do it convincingly. Offer to help him if he struggles.

Tinkerer
2017-08-04, 10:53 AM
Give roleplaying experience to the players. That will give him an incentive he can understand to learn to roleplay, since he's a power gamer he'll try to do it convincingly. Offer to help him if he struggles.

That's how I normally run it. If the campaign is 50% roleplaying and 50% combat then make the experience 50% from roleplaying and 50% from combat. Hell make the treasure 50/50 if that works. You can kill that guy for 5 xp or you can interact with him for 100xp. Not entirely sure if that will help or not though since if he's got a real Mary Sue he thinks everything should be about him.

Maybe suggest that you guys go through the first session while he tries to figure out the motivation. I know often times I only sketch up the barest of bones outline before the first session then I go back and fill in a lot of the details. I used to draw up really elaborate backstories before hand but over the years I realized I need to sit down and play the character in order to truly get a feel for them and where I want to take them.

Having one fellow like that on the team can be fun. For flaws I'd recommend: No Inside Voice, Can't Turn Down A Challenge, Addiction: Suplexes. But yeah a Saxton Hale character is definitely a character of action, not talk. Maybe mix Saxton Hale with Ron Swanson? Actually Swanson is a great example of a character like that in a much more talky role with several flaws and interesting traits.

Rynjin
2017-08-04, 12:24 PM
This character he's been making is a barbarian that has been inspired by Saxton Hale from TF2. He likes to brawl and wrestle opponents, and he can do that well, but oitside of that his character has a work-in-progress backstory and no motivation. We've gone over concepts like making his character a successful businessman that left his fortunes behind for his passion of wrestling to him being of a noble bloodline that has descended from the war God Tempus, but these ideas haven't stuck.

He's at a loss for how to play a character that is inspired by a character that already has a pretty detailed and amusing backstory that can be adapted to a fantasy setting really easily.

He's a lost cause.

goto124
2017-08-04, 11:48 PM
Do you think he's trying to roleplay at all? No amount of advice can help someone who isn't willing in the first place.

hymer
2017-08-05, 12:36 AM
Do you think he's trying to roleplay at all? No amount of advice can help someone who isn't willing in the first place.

This is very true.

Have you tried examining his... capabilities? I mean, ask him e.g. how two different characters would act and react in the same situation, one where their skills and powers don't really apply. How would Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson handle a distraught stranger met on country road? Watson would likely ask what was wrong out of the goodness of his heart, while Holmes would (at least initially) be uninterested - in the person. When listening to the distraught person, Holmes would then interest himself with the technicalities of the tale of woe, while Watson would be more focused on the emotional side of things. Finally, Sherlock would distance himself afterwards, after perhaps a cool word of wisdom, unless the problem proved intellectually interesting. Watson would involve himself if he thought he could be of any use.

If he can't see how different characters act in different ways based on their, well, character...

goto124
2017-08-05, 12:54 AM
<i>character</i>...

Square brackets in place of the triangular ones.

Quertus
2017-08-05, 01:07 AM
My advice, for what it's worth:

- When you say, 50% combat and 50% roleplaying, do you mean on a session by session basis? I.e. each session is roughly 50/50. I'd advise that you aim for that. I'm very into the roleplaying side of things but if I'm playing a four-hour session of D&D then I want at least a couple of fights, since combat is a big part of D&D.

- Let him play a character whose whole thing is "I love fighting" if that's what he really wants. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that kind of character...

- ... but be very clear with him that there will be interaction and other types of scenes as well as combat, that the other players enjoy that stuff, and crucially that using "it's what my character would do" as an excuse to spoil their fun with random acts of violence isn't fair, since D&D is a team game and a social activity.

- If it doesn't work out it doesn't work out, and you might just have to say "this is the style of game we're playing, maybe you can find a different group that prefers a more hacknslash style. Just avoid coming across like you're making a value judgement on his preferences, since there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to play the old-school dungeon-crawl-monster-bash-treasure-grab style of D&D. It's just not the kind of game you're running.

I hope you manage to sort it out.


This. 100% this. I was going to post something similar, but you gone and done it for me.

Yup. The (horrible and awesome) way I learned to roleplay was very heavy on the session 0, and saying YOU WILL NOT impede the fun of others, and laying down exactly what kind of character was acceptable in session 0.


Do you think he's trying to roleplay at all? No amount of advice can help someone who isn't willing in the first place.

Well, I've played with plenty of people who can't, won't, and don't care to roleplay. And that's fine, as long as they don't **** all over everyone else's fun.

This player needs to be table potty trained.

daniel_ream
2017-08-05, 01:22 AM
[...] I feel like he'd have more fun roleplaying if he'd create a character that actually has depth and isn't just a Mary Sue.

The player in question clearly disagrees, or he'd have bought into the roleplaying part of the game by now. It's not like he doesn't have role models and opportunity.

"Training" adults to play RPGs in a certain way is like trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes time, and it annoys the pig (it's also rude and presumptuous). You already know that he doesn't want to roleplay, and isn't willing to sit quietly while others do, and justifies his disruption with the most iconic passive-aggressive-***hole excuse there is.

There's no fixing this. Disinvite him.

oxybe
2017-08-05, 03:38 AM
Well, I've played with plenty of people who can't, won't, and don't care to roleplay. And that's fine, as long as they don't **** all over everyone else's fun.

This player needs to be table potty trained.

From what I can tell the only person at the table with an issue is the GM, who hasn't mentioned any of the other players or getting feedback from them.

Just the GM thinks the player would have more fun if he played differently, and worries the players' focus on combat might cause him to interrupt times when the others are roleplaying.

This is where the "Don't be a Richard" rule comes into play. If you're a Richard, you get booted.

I say: let Fighty McFightstuffs... fight stuffs, as long as he's not causing problems for the others at the table. If he feels like interacting with non-punchable stuff, he will. If he doesn't and still seems to have fun, then you're succeeding as a GM.

I don't like store bought mayo. I don't order food with mayo (or at least I order and make sure to say "no mayo"). If you tell me "I'm sure you'd like eating at my place if you just ate food with mayo more" does not incentivize me to suddenly want to eat mayo. It's not a thing I like, and actively forcing me to eat it would make me dislike eating at your place more.

However I've had homemade mayo I didn't mind so much mind you. The key thing is that these are still two different expressions of the same idea, mayo, which maybe what our GM here needs to do.

I'm going to guess the GM just isn't sure what engages the player. sometimes that can be hard to find out exactly what a player will respond to: not everyone is out looking for a romance, haggling market prices or political intrigue. Try having equally over-the-top villains call him out or focus their attention on him. If he wants to play a boisterous bruiser, try giving him a boisterous antagonist or rival to play off or have mooks run away from him. Try to play up and engage the style of game he likes and see how he responds rather then throwing plot at the wall and seeing what sticks.

goto124
2017-08-05, 04:26 AM
This campaign doesn't start until a week from today. In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character." It just turns a calm roleplaying session into GTA.

The moment you accept him into the campaign, you have to carry him all the way. Do you accept the effort you will have to put in if you take him in? What of the other players who will play under you, in the same game as someone who actively disrupts roleplaying sections? It's not just you and that one player.

Kicking out a player from an ongoing game will cause a lot more bad blood than refusing him from the very start.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-05, 05:47 AM
Have his character be the bodyguard of another player's character

While I wouldn't always recommend this, if someone has no backstory or has no reason to adventure with the group, this is a very good way to get them in. One of my friends is rubbish at coming up with what her character will be like before session 2/3, so we help her with the build she wants and work out why she's with the group (she was once a nun in training so she could be our primary nun's hands, but she was also our healer). Not 100% in agreement with the rest of your post, there's nothing wrong with him not roleplaying as long as he's not disruptive, but I agree with the general idea.


I mean, if they sound like they're going to be disruptive and not a good fit for this campaign, maybe don't game with them?

Yeah, this is probably the simplest solution. I recommend a simple 'there's not going to be a ton of fighting in this game, I don't think you'd enjoy it' or something along those lines, be polite.


Give roleplaying experience to the players. That will give him an incentive he can understand to learn to roleplay, since he's a power gamer he'll try to do it convincingly. Offer to help him if he struggles.

I'd recommend one shot bennies over roleplaying XP, I like to hand out rerolls/action points/fate points, but incentives for roleplaying are good. If you give bennies for certain things most players will tend towards that, it's always better to lead the group towards roleplay than force a player to do what they don't want to.

Quertus
2017-08-05, 07:38 AM
From what I can tell the only person at the table with an issue is the GM, who hasn't mentioned any of the other players or getting feedback from them.

Just the GM thinks the player would have more fun if he played differently, and worries the players' focus on combat might cause him to interrupt times when the others are roleplaying.

This is where the "Don't be a Richard" rule comes into play. If you're a Richard, you get booted.

I say: let Fighty McFightstuffs... fight stuffs, as long as he's not causing problems for the others at the table. If he feels like interacting with non-punchable stuff, he will. If he doesn't and still seems to have fun, then you're succeeding as a GM.

I don't like store bought mayo. I don't order food with mayo (or at least I order and make sure to say "no mayo"). If you tell me "I'm sure you'd like eating at my place if you just ate food with mayo more" does not incentivize me to suddenly want to eat mayo. It's not a thing I like, and actively forcing me to eat it would make me dislike eating at your place more.

However I've had homemade mayo I didn't mind so much mind you. The key thing is that these are still two different expressions of the same idea, mayo, which maybe what our GM here needs to do.

I'm going to guess the GM just isn't sure what engages the player. sometimes that can be hard to find out exactly what a player will respond to: not everyone is out looking for a romance, haggling market prices or political intrigue. Try having equally over-the-top villains call him out or focus their attention on him. If he wants to play a boisterous bruiser, try giving him a boisterous antagonist or rival to play off or have mooks run away from him. Try to play up and engage the style of game he likes and see how he responds rather then throwing plot at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Ok, that's fair. I was bringing in my biases from most of the groups I've played with. But, long ago, I did game with a very few groups that would have found the behavior of murdering during the "talky bits" not unacceptable. It depends on which type of group the GM has as to whether or not my comment is actually applicable.

Oh, and re: mayo, I've had several people who hate mustard tell me, "you make mustard taste good". Same mustard, just the way I fix things. So, I mostly agree that how you present things can really affect their acceptance rate.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-05, 07:43 AM
I say: let Fighty McFightstuffs... fight stuffs, as long as he's not causing problems for the others at the table. If he feels like interacting with non-punchable stuff, he will. If he doesn't and still seems to have fun, then you're succeeding as a GM.
While this is true...


In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character." It just turns a calm roleplaying session into GTA.
This doesn't sound like someone who's "not causing problems for the others at the table."

Also,


"Training" adults to play RPGs in a certain way is like trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes time, and it annoys the pig (it's also rude and presumptuous).
Holy geez, this. You're welcome to ask people if they want to try playing a different style of game, but if they're happy with their murder-hobo-ing/combat-as-sport/combat-as-war/low-roleplaying/roleplaying-only/highly freeeform/slavishly-RAW/high-op/low-op/whatever style you disagree with, for god's sake, don't try to "teach" them to play "properly." Don't be a snob.

Hackulator
2017-08-05, 08:13 AM
Let him play how he wants but don't let his character get a free pass for doing stupid ****. If he goes off and kills random people, have him be punished or even executed for it.

Quertus
2017-08-05, 09:23 AM
Holy geez, this. You're welcome to ask people if they want to try playing a different style of game, but if they're happy with their murder-hobo-ing/combat-as-sport/combat-as-war/low-roleplaying/roleplaying-only/highly freeeform/slavishly-RAW/high-op/low-op/whatever style you disagree with, for god's sake, don't try to "teach" them to play "properly." Don't be a snob.

I mean, I learned to play in a "roleplay isn't the most important thing, it's the only thing" style that would applaud "my guy" syndrome, viewing it as good role-playing, and a failure of Session 0. Yet even I don't force people out of their "no role-playing" zone if that's what makes them happy*.

Although I may need to work on the "slavishly RAW" rules lawyer bit, especially when it comes to teaching new misinformed players what the rules of the game actually are.

* so long as they aren't selfishly harming other people's fun.

PhoenixPhyre
2017-08-05, 11:16 AM
Holy geez, this. You're welcome to ask people if they want to try playing a different style of game, but if they're happy with their murder-hobo-ing/combat-as-sport/combat-as-war/low-roleplaying/roleplaying-only/highly freeeform/slavishly-RAW/high-op/low-op/whatever style you disagree with, for god's sake, don't try to "teach" them to play "properly." Don't be a snob.

Amen. I dislike the idea that RPGs are for "teaching others to X". Let the game be a game--any play-style that you have fun with is a valid play-style if you can find a table that matches.

On the other hand, allowing disruptions at the table is bad. Simple comments from a trusted source (DM or player, doesn't matter) can make a big difference. Some people, for one reason or another, don't realize that they're being disruptive. That's not trying to "train" another player to "play right," just trying to maximize the fun for everyone. Very few people are completely unwilling to make minor changes if they're over-all having fun. Phrasing it as "to fit at this table, we need your help" (or something similar) makes a big difference.

I have had an OOC talk with one kid from my school group--he was only in it for combat and had very few social skills. So much so that he was doing stupid things that made the group (both characters and players) not trust him. A simple "remember there are other people at the table, and your behavior is alienating them" made him much more amenable and tempered the worst of the behavior. He still mainly came alive during combat, but tried in other cases. I flat out gave him a backstory (for a replacement character so that he'd fit into the world and have a reason to be in that place at that time), and he tried (mostly successfully) to use it.

HidesHisEyes
2017-08-05, 02:03 PM
"Training" adults to play RPGs in a certain way is like trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes time, and it annoys the pig (it's also rude and presumptuous). You already know that he doesn't want to roleplay, and isn't willing to sit quietly while others do, and justifies his disruption with the most iconic passive-aggressive-***hole excuse there is.

There's no fixing this. Disinvite him.




I don't like store bought mayo. I don't order food with mayo (or at least I order and make sure to say "no mayo"). If you tell me "I'm sure you'd like eating at my place if you just ate food with mayo more" does not incentivize me to suddenly want to eat mayo. It's not a thing I like, and actively forcing me to eat it would make me dislike eating at your place more.

I have to point out an experience I had that stops me from fully agreeing with this. In a group I used to regularly DM for, we decided to switch things around and have another guy DM for a while. As a player he's rather like the player the op describes: he's a barbarian/fighter brute who lives for battle. He has a some nice touches to his character and backstory but in practice they don't lead to much roleplaying, and this guy is much more into the combat and mechanical character-building side of things. As I had expected, his sessions when he was DM were almost entirely combat encounters, dotted around a dungeon full of monsters and treasure. A real old-school approach that hadn't appealed to me so much before then. He even encouraged us to map the dungeon based on his descriptions, as that would stop us getting lost. At first I said "can't you just assume the characters are mapping and help us out if we as players can't remember a finer point of dungeon geography?" I had only ever considered mapping a dungeon to be an annoying chore that got in the way of the gameplay. But we wanted us to map. So we did, and after a couple of sessions I started to see it instead as PART of the gameplay, and to really enjoy it. I loved that even though the majority of each session was fighting, in between we had to be making this map as best we could, hoping it was close to his map so we could reliably get out of the dungeon for a rest when we had to, it added a whole side to the game that I had never experienced before.

Sorry for the rambling story. My point is, don't assume that you already know your preferred play style, and by extension don't assume that your players already know theirs. Introduce them to new things by saying "this the style of game we're playing and it's not gonna change" and maybe they really will find they like mayo after all. I did.

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-05, 02:06 PM
Let him play how he wants but don't let his character get a free pass for doing stupid ****. If he goes off and kills random people, have him be punished or even executed for it.

Do you not do that with all the characters who do such things?

FreddyNoNose
2017-08-05, 02:11 PM
I am running a 50% combat 50% Roleplay D&D 5e campaign soon and all of my players are rpg vetrens. All of the characters are set except for one... One of my players is infamous for powergaming and I discovered why; he doesn't understand what creates a convincing character. All of his characters I've ever seen him play have always been the same little Mary Sue murder robot and all they ever seem to care about is being the best at everything.

When I ask him what his character's motivations are, he doesn't know. When I ask him how his backstory affects him, he doesn't know. When I ask him what flaws his character has, he asks me "Flaws?" All he wants to be is good at combat and I'm afraid he'll just get bored and try to cause chaos whenever we're in a roleplay situation, as he tends to do. Should I let him down easy or try to carry him through the campaign?

--Details for those who may be interested--

This character he's been making is a barbarian that has been inspired by Saxton Hale from TF2. He likes to brawl and wrestle opponents, and he can do that well, but oitside of that his character has a work-in-progress backstory and no motivation. We've gone over concepts like making his character a successful businessman that left his fortunes behind for his passion of wrestling to him being of a noble bloodline that has descended from the war God Tempus, but these ideas haven't stuck.

Instead of these passive aggressive responses that some have suggested, just simply be an adult and talk to him. Tell him YOUR ISSUE with HIS CHOICE of GAME PLAY. Between the two of you, you should be able to find a middle ground is you are both OPEN MINDED about it. Otherwise, if it is too bad for the group for him to play the way he chooses to, you two can come up with a result where he doesn't play in your game. It shouldn't be too hard to do.

hymer
2017-08-05, 02:32 PM
Square brackets in place of the triangular ones.

Thanks! Fixed it.

Mastikator
2017-08-05, 05:49 PM
The player in question clearly disagrees, or he'd have bought into the roleplaying part of the game by now. It's not like he doesn't have role models and opportunity.

"Training" adults to play RPGs in a certain way is like trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes time, and it annoys the pig (it's also rude and presumptuous). You already know that he doesn't want to roleplay, and isn't willing to sit quietly while others do, and justifies his disruption with the most iconic passive-aggressive-***hole excuse there is.

There's no fixing this. Disinvite him.

Adults learn new skills all the time. You probably do too, or at least I hope you do for your sake.

This guy the OP is talking about probably just doesn't know what he's missing, he probably doesn't know that roleplaying your character sitting around the camp fire and talking IC about his backstory with other PCs is more fun than murder-hoboing around.

Hackulator
2017-08-05, 05:56 PM
Adults learn new skills all the time. You probably do too, or at least I hope you do for your sake.

This guy the OP is talking about probably just doesn't know what he's missing, he probably doesn't know that roleplaying your character sitting around the camp fire and talking IC about his backstory with other PCs is more fun than murder-hoboing around.

Suggesting that one thing is more fun than another in this situation is pretty silly. Different people enjoy different things. This is not some sort of clear cut "playing your favorite game is more fun than root canal" situation.

Jay R
2017-08-05, 08:33 PM
I get that some people like combat more and get a thrill from that "Roll for initiative," but I feel like he'd have more fun roleplaying if he'd create a character that actually has depth and isn't just a Mary Sue.

It's quite possible that he wouldn't.

Many people play Monopoly without pretending to be a tycoon, and many people play Clue without playing the role of a detective.

Similarly, it's quite possible for somebody to enjoy D&D without ever wanting to play a role. They are trying to win the game in front of them.

I have been very frustrated with such players until I realized that what they do is just fine, even if it's not what I do. My character assumes that their character is just interested in fighting, and therefore considers them excellent allies, and doesn't waste his time trying to get them to care about the quest in any way other than tactically.

oxybe
2017-08-06, 12:30 AM
Sorry for the rambling story. My point is, don't assume that you already know your preferred play style, and by extension don't assume that your players already know theirs. Introduce them to new things by saying "this the style of game we're playing and it's not gonna change" and maybe they really will find they like mayo after all. I did.

After 20 years of playing various games, I think it's safe to assume I know my preferred play style, and I trust people enough to believe they know what they like.

I know outliers to any rule exist, but I'm not going to needlessly subject myself to romcoms in the hope of finding that one romcom I'll like. It's a largely fruitless struggle i'm better off just watching stuff I do like while keeping an ear out in the off chance that something comes along that I do want.

I know my tastes and it's pretty annoying to have someone go "oh you'll like it if you try it".

I'm 31. I've paid off my college debts, have been living by my own means since graduation and I've been around the game store a few times. I'm not some 7 year old who's media exposure amounts to rewatching Ghostbusters, TMNT & HeMan between bouts of Super Mario Brothers & Legend of Zelda.

If a GM doesn't assume me to know my own tastes and preferences, why should I assume the GM to have the skill or ability to run a decent game?

Faily
2017-08-06, 11:30 AM
Or you know, just because we've passed the 30 years mark (hi there!), doesn't mean we can't occassionally try something new and different, because you won't know you like/dislike it until you've tried it.

At the gaming-table, I will always encourage people to try something new (or at the very least not be disruptive if they get bored). In fact, in our weekly Pathfinder group, our youngest player who is in his early 20s (the rest of us are in our 30s and 40s) was the typical munchkiny-rollplayer who was only interested in how to deal the most damage the fastest. The rest of us enjoy a mixture of mechanics with heavy roleplaying, but he wanted to join our weekly games. And from there we more or less pressed him to consider character and roleplay much more than he had before... before joining our group, he was known to other players for being a disruptive player who did stupid **** when he was bored. Eventually, he grew invested in the aspect of roleplaying and the identity of his character too. His longest-running character ended up having a lot of interesting story development and has become a great villain-character.

That isn't to say he doesn't still prefer big numbers and hitting things with a melee-weapon, but he has come to appriciate the roleplay-aspect of roleplaying games much more, as well as respecting more that other people like it.

So while you can't change what people primarly enjoy, you can perhaps teach them why others like the different aspects of it and appriciate it some more, and stop being disruptive players.

Personally, I've been pushing my own boundaries and testing my own preferences the past years. Either by playing new games with different systems, or playing character types I have not played before (like only playing classes in D&D/Pathfinder I have never tried, or clans/schools I have not played before in L5R). When I started playing D&D at first, a long time ago, I thought I would never be able to play Paladins because they seemed so restrictive and super-lawful... then I tried it and enjoyed every moment of it and it stands as one of my favorites today. I felt only comfortable GMing Legend of the Five Rings, but I pushed myself to run a Pathfinder-campaign and now I'm also planning to run a FFG Star Wars-game, because I was pleasantly surprised at how much I liked the system, despite all my numerous reservations against it before I played it ("ew, weird dice system" to name one).

Quertus
2017-08-06, 11:54 AM
After 20 years of playing various games, I think it's safe to assume I know my preferred play style, and I trust people enough to believe they know what they like.

I know outliers to any rule exist, but I'm not going to needlessly subject myself to romcoms in the hope of finding that one romcom I'll like. It's a largely fruitless struggle i'm better off just watching stuff I do like while keeping an ear out in the off chance that something comes along that I do want.

I know my tastes and it's pretty annoying to have someone go "oh you'll like it if you try it".

I'm 31. I've paid off my college debts, have been living by my own means since graduation and I've been around the game store a few times. I'm not some 7 year old who's media exposure amounts to rewatching Ghostbusters, TMNT & HeMan between bouts of Super Mario Brothers & Legend of Zelda.

If a GM doesn't assume me to know my own tastes and preferences, why should I assume the GM to have the skill or ability to run a decent game?

So, if you're biologically male, you've had maybe 6 years since your brain finished developing to determine your preferences.

Now, my science is often out of date (last I knew, scientists were baffled that bumblebees could fly), but afaik tastebuds change every 7 years. So you haven't even experienced your first post-brain-growth taste change yet.

Now, from a more relevant standpoint, you either believe that people are immutable, or that they can change. If you believe that they are immutable, then, yes, you know your tastes, fine.

Me, I believe that people are ever changing. What you used to like it's only a strong indicator of what you still like. I play wizards. It's what I enjoy. Yet I still occasionally play something else, ostensibly to better play wizards by understanding other PoVs, but also to check if my tastes have changed. In the nearly 40 years I've been playing RPGs, they haven't. But, someday, theoretically, they might.

Someone asking you to try something, at least for a one shot, isn't a sign of disrespect. Unless you're 5. Or it's fatal.

ImNotTrevor
2017-08-06, 12:06 PM
Or like... ask if he even is interested in trying a new playstyle. If not, part ways. It's not your responsibility, job, nor duty to force someone else to try new things. Believe it or not, you are not the final arbiter of the "correct" or "better" way to play. (Especially in D&D 3.5. Technically he's playing more in line with what the rules expect from him than you are, for that edition)

Feel free to ask. If he says no, ask him to at least stop being disruptive. If he makes an excuse, tell him that clearly his preferred playstyle doesn't mesh and you wish him luck in future RPG playing.

You know, grownup conversation between grownups where you treat him as a human being whos preferences are exactly as valid as yours. Whether his preferences could maybe possibly change is irrelevant if he doesn't want them to. Respect that. And he should respect your request to have him no longer participate and cause disruptions.

Amazing where we get by treating one another with respect.

Again, in big letters,
THE MERE POSSIBILITY OF HIS PREFERENCES MAYBE CHANGING DOES NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO FORCE HIM TO DO ANYTHING. ASK OF HE IS WILLING TO TRY. THE END.

PhoenixPhyre
2017-08-06, 12:16 PM
Or like... ask if he even is interested in trying a new playstyle. If not, part ways. It's not your responsibility, job, nor duty to force someone else to try new things. Believe it or not, you are not the final arbiter of the "correct" or "better" way to play. (Especially in D&D 3.5. Technically he's playing more in line with what the rules expect from him than you are, for that edition)

Feel free to ask. If he says no, ask him to at least stop being disruptive. If he makes an excuse, tell him that clearly his preferred playstyle doesn't mesh and you wish him luck in future RPG playing.

You know, grownup conversation between grownups where you treat him as a human being whos preferences are exactly as valid as yours. Whether his preferences could maybe possibly change is irrelevant if he doesn't want them to. Respect that. And he should respect your request to have him no longer participate and cause disruptions.

Amazing where we get by treating one another with respect.

Again, in big letters,
THE MERE POSSIBILITY OF HIS PREFERENCES MAYBE CHANGING DOES NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO FORCE HIM TO DO ANYTHING. ASK OF HE IS WILLING TO TRY. THE END.

Amen. This assumption that there is one true play-style and that anyone who disagrees is either suffering from false consciousness or is acting out of malice is seriously annoying. There is nothing wrong with a serious, respectful OOC conversation. In fact, it solves so many problems.

scalyfreak
2017-08-06, 01:13 PM
Amen. This assumption that there is one true play-style and that anyone who disagrees is either suffering from false consciousness or is acting out of malice is seriously annoying. There is nothing wrong with a serious, respectful OOC conversation. In fact, it solves so many problems.

And it prevents an even larger number of them.

Bizarre how that works.

Guizonde
2017-08-06, 02:43 PM
what is the player's motivation to keep on playing dnd?

is it only to murder his way across the monster manual? has he ever played anything but a barbarian? sounds to me like the dude has a fixation on stereotypical barbarians. that's fine, by the way. sometimes, you just want to kill things rather than think. does the player have any aspirations besides being the best murderstick of the group? since you called him a powergamer, why isn't he going the codzilla route or the broken wizard? too cerebral for him? not manly enough? sometimes, an archetype will get you into a specific mindframe regarding classes. i've got the same problem with rogues being lithe and untrustworthy magpies.

if it bugs you too much to have a one-trick pony at the table, talk to him about it, but i'd rather say make him create his character's background on a session by session basis. sometimes you get writer's block and improvising something will get you going. why is he a murderhobo? because he was a child soldier: violence is all he knows about human interaction. boom, mid-session revelation. is it important to the plot? nope, but it makes the character a bit more tragic, doesn't it?

how long has he been playing? wait until he gets bored of only doing combat, perhaps make him envious of characters dealing with the story and intrigue, and once in a while, he'll see that there are other aspects of the game besides: go in, kill stuff to death, loot, repeat. (i played a character like that, i was bored with it by the 6th session. never playing true-blue beatstick ever again). that, or show him a wizard in all its cheesy potential: i'm talking breaking out time stops, ungodly buffs, summonings, and possibly a prestidigitation or three all in one turn. if he's such a powergamer, he'll have to agree that there's more to the game than arm-wrestling the tarrasque (and winning) while urinating on a balor.

Jay R
2017-08-06, 03:19 PM
Remember the first Avengers movie? In the battle of New York, Cap is giving instructions to each person - detailed, carefully planned, and precise. Then he gets to the last member of his team and said, "Hulk - smash!" This was clearly understood, and made him a good team member.

Your party needs to recognize, as Iron Man does in the same movie, that, "We have a Hulk." Handled properly, that's a great asset. Why would you want to get him to play a role he doesn't enjoy, and that would be less valuable?

I stopped encouraging back-stories from people with no interest in them. I have one player whose basic back story is "I'm a fighter who likes to hit things."

I once insisted on at least a paragraph, and it came out something like this: "Forlong grew up watching the fighters at practice, and always wanted to join them. He considers his sword his closest friend, and always takes care of it. He's now looking for opportunities to use his fighting skills to help people."

I'm sure that if I pushed him to do it, he could write five pages of back-story that boil down to "I'm a fighter who likes to hit things."

And we play together just fine. I tend to play as if Glen's character is a childhood friend of mine, and that my PC trusts him completely, but doesn't count on him to solve puzzles or convince others to help us. There are such people, and a character like that is a great asset for a party.

Dimers
2017-08-06, 08:02 PM
Now, my science is often out of date (last I knew, scientists were baffled that bumblebees could fly) ...

'Snopes' is just a colloquial form of 'nope' (http://www.snopes.com/science/bumblebees.asp).

* This is not intended as commentary on the content of your post. Just info about bumblebees and scientists.

daniel_ream
2017-08-06, 08:12 PM
People are focusing way too much on the "false consciousness" and "even a combat monster can be an asset" and not this:


In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character."

The problem isn't that the player in question doesn't want to roleplay, or doesn't know how and needs to be gently led, the poor lamb.

The problem is that he's a **** who's making the session all about him.

HidesHisEyes
2017-08-07, 05:05 AM
Or like... ask if he even is interested in trying a new playstyle. If not, part ways. It's not your responsibility, job, nor duty to force someone else to try new things. Believe it or not, you are not the final arbiter of the "correct" or "better" way to play. (Especially in D&D 3.5. Technically he's playing more in line with what the rules expect from him than you are, for that edition)

Feel free to ask. If he says no, ask him to at least stop being disruptive. If he makes an excuse, tell him that clearly his preferred playstyle doesn't mesh and you wish him luck in future RPG playing.

You know, grownup conversation between grownups where you treat him as a human being whos preferences are exactly as valid as yours. Whether his preferences could maybe possibly change is irrelevant if he doesn't want them to. Respect that. And he should respect your request to have him no longer participate and cause disruptions.

Amazing where we get by treating one another with respect.

Again, in big letters,
THE MERE POSSIBILITY OF HIS PREFERENCES MAYBE CHANGING DOES NOT GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO FORCE HIM TO DO ANYTHING. ASK OF HE IS WILLING TO TRY. THE END.

Be cool honeybunny. Everybody be cool. No one is saying anything about bad wrong fun. The suggestion was just that the OP should make some attempt to get this player to get on board with the group's collective style, see if he can start to enjoy RPing a bit, rather than just diagnose incompatible styles and tell him to find another game IMMEDIATELY. If it doesn't work out, no big deal.

Edit to clarify a bit: In my experience there is one another really important factor to consider, and that's the real life logistics of playing tabletop RPGs. It's not always easy to find a group of people to play with and when you do it highly unlikely (again, IMX) that everyone has the same preferences. Of course you respect each other's differences, you're absolutely right. But if you're the one player who differs significantly then the onus is more on you to try and compromise a bit. After all, everyone is there to play SOMETHING, so compromise is the name of the game. I stand by my original advice on page 1 of this thread, which involves the dm also compromising by making sure there's enough combat in there to give the combat-lovers their fix. As I said, I'm one of those combat-lovers, so this is not coming from some elitist RP-is-king perspective.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-07, 05:34 AM
People are focusing way too much on the "false consciousness" and "even a combat monster can be an asset" and not this:



The problem isn't that the player in question doesn't want to roleplay, or doesn't know how and needs to be gently led, the poor lamb.

The problem is that he's a **** who's making the session all about him.

I totally agree here.

I mean, if he doesn't enjoy roleplaying, it's a great reason to suggest he wouldn't want to play with a roleplay focused group.

Not roleplaying is generally fine, it's his choice, messing up the game is not. If all he's interested in is combat there's no problem if he sits quietly in the noncombat portions. But if he disrupts the game because he's bored and wants to get back to combat, he is being a problem player (not a massive one it sounds like, certainly a step below murdering an entire town because there hasn't been a combat for ten minutes, but a problem). Like every problem player the solution is to talk to him about it and come to an agreement, whether that involves him being in the game or agreeing that he won't enjoy it.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-08-07, 10:21 AM
People are focusing way too much on the "false consciousness" and "even a combat monster can be an asset" and not this:



In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character."


The problem isn't that the player in question doesn't want to roleplay, or doesn't know how and needs to be gently led, the poor lamb.

The problem is that he's a **** who's making the session all about him.
Emphasizing this again. The question isn't "how do I deal with a player who doesn't roleplay" as much as it is "how do I deal with a player who acts disruptive when bored?"

ImNotTrevor
2017-08-07, 11:45 AM
Be cool honeybunny. Everybody be cool. No one is saying anything about bad wrong fun. The suggestion was just that the OP should make some attempt to get this player to get on board with the group's collective style, see if he can start to enjoy RPing a bit, rather than just diagnose incompatible styles and tell him to find another game IMMEDIATELY. If it doesn't work out, no big deal.

Edit to clarify a bit: In my experience there is one another really important factor to consider, and that's the real life logistics of playing tabletop RPGs. It's not always easy to find a group of people to play with and when you do it highly unlikely (again, IMX) that everyone has the same preferences. Of course you respect each other's differences, you're absolutely right. But if you're the one player who differs significantly then the onus is more on you to try and compromise a bit. After all, everyone is there to play SOMETHING, so compromise is the name of the game. I stand by my original advice on page 1 of this thread, which involves the dm also compromising by making sure there's enough combat in there to give the combat-lovers their fix. As I said, I'm one of those combat-lovers, so this is not coming from some elitist RP-is-king perspective.

Since you apparently only read the all-caps part:

I strongly suggested in my post to have a conversation and see if this person is even interested in a playstyle shift or would be willing to try one before inflicting things on him without permission to try and sneakily "groom" him. Chances are this will only worsen the problem.

Talk it out. Conversation with respect between two grown adults is powerful. Use It.

daniel_ream
2017-08-07, 04:01 PM
[...] murdering an entire town because there hasn't been a combat for ten minutes

I'd like to see more players and GMs embrace the power of "no, that didn't happen".

Roleplaying games are cooperative, social activities. If someone is being deliberately and willfully disruptive, there is no need to accept the giant turd they just threw in the fiction punchbowl.

"This is taking too long, I stab the ambassador."
"No, that didn't happen."

"I pick the wizards' pocket while he's talking about the gem or whatever."
"No, that didn't happen."

"An ethereal mummy hits you from the astral plane, lose two levels."
"No, that didn't happen."

Psikerlord
2017-08-07, 06:16 PM
Have his character be the bodyguard of another player's character, a player you trust won't abuse the position. His job is to fight. He's to be an intimidating presence when there is no fighting to prevent others from starting fights against the one he is guarding. He's the mook you see all the time around the BBEG in movies and tv shows.

The guarded player can give him orders of when to fight and when not to fight. To help teach roleplaying the guarded player can from time to time ask the bodyguard his opinion on the matter at hand for something other than he wants to smash. If the bodyguard voluntarily offers an opinion that's not about fighting that's a good sign. Unless it's too obvious a stupid thing, the guarded player should go with his idea from time to time. With your role as DM, let his idea work from time to time as well.

Yeah I think this is the best way to approach it. Also be sure to have him describe his PC's attacks, how he finishes off monsters, sometimes how he suffers his own wounds, etc. Get him roleplaying in combat first and you might eek some more RP out of him outside of combat later. But combat might just be his thing. I wouldnt push him too much, as long as he doesnt disturb others fun with the non-combat parts of the game.

Psikerlord
2017-08-07, 06:17 PM
sorry double post

goto124
2017-08-08, 06:04 AM
as long as he doesnt disturb others fun with the non-combat parts of the game.

There's the issue...


This campaign doesn't start until a week from today. In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character." It just turns a calm roleplaying session into GTA.

HidesHisEyes
2017-08-09, 04:19 AM
Since you apparently only read the all-caps part:

I strongly suggested in my post to have a conversation and see if this person is even interested in a playstyle shift or would be willing to try one before inflicting things on him without permission to try and sneakily "groom" him. Chances are this will only worsen the problem.

Talk it out. Conversation with respect between two grown adults is powerful. Use It.

Apologies then. I honestly think we're all on the same side though, I didn't see anyone suggest "grooming".


I'd like to see more players and GMs embrace the power of "no, that didn't happen".

Roleplaying games are cooperative, social activities. If someone is being deliberately and willfully disruptive, there is no need to accept the giant turd they just threw in the fiction punchbowl.

"This is taking too long, I stab the ambassador."
"No, that didn't happen."

"I pick the wizards' pocket while he's talking about the gem or whatever."
"No, that didn't happen."

"An ethereal mummy hits you from the astral plane, lose two levels."
"No, that didn't happen."

Yes, me too. Sadly a lot of people start warbling about player agency at this point. Or they remind you that "the point of D&D is to have fun", apparently oblivious to the fact that, for some of us, "fun" sometimes requires some investment and unfolds over time.

daniel_ream
2017-08-09, 06:00 AM
Sadly a lot of people start warbling about player agency at this point. Or they remind you that "the point of D&D is to have fun"

Some people are so insecure they cannot handle any amount of submission of the ego to a group goal. RPGs probably aren't the right hobby for such people.

99% of the problems in this hobby really come down to insecurity and maturity.

Anonymouswizard
2017-08-09, 06:36 AM
I'd like to see more players and GMs embrace the power of "no, that didn't happen".

Roleplaying games are cooperative, social activities. If someone is being deliberately and willfully disruptive, there is no need to accept the giant turd they just threw in the fiction punchbowl.

"This is taking too long, I stab the ambassador."
"No, that didn't happen."

"I pick the wizards' pocket while he's talking about the gem or whatever."
"No, that didn't happen."

"An ethereal mummy hits you from the astral plane, lose two levels."
"No, that didn't happen."

I mean, I've discovered the power of 'are you sure'. For 90% of players it gets them to reconsider, and I can live without playing with the other 10%. Either you don't disrupt everybody else's fun but bring up your concerns (maybe we can compromise), you excuse yourself from the group because you won't have fun, or you'll be talked to and be thrown out if nobody else shares your concerns and you won't compromise.

I mean, there's nothing wrong with a hacking your way through the Monster Manual game, it's just not what I run, I like lower combat games (and so I don't run D&D). When I'm running games will be low combat, with an attempted target of once a session because players like combat, but if that's too little for you talk about it and we might be able to compromise.

prufock
2017-08-09, 06:38 AM
To offer some potentially practical solutions:

1. Play a game that is less vulnerable to powergaming. Some systems are very by-the-numbers - what we sometimes call "crunchy" - which can suggest to players that the numbers are the most important part, and getting the numbers as high as possible is the goal. Play a different system, one that is less crunchy, even free-form if you need to.

2. Have an up-front conversation with the guy. "X is the kind of game we all want to play except for you. Are you willing to attempt X style of game instead of your usual Y style of game? How can we make sure this game is fun for you as well as the rest of the players?" If no agreement can be reached, suggest he sit this one out. He's still welcome to the group, but make sure to keep in mind, and even state, that not all members of a group are going to agree on what type of game they want to play all the time. I've sat out games from my regular group because they did nothing for me (I gave it a chance, but ultimately chose not to play VtM). And that's okay.

3. Learn to say "no" to your players. Once you've made it clear what type of game this will be, if he still plays disruptively, say no. No, you don't kill that shopkeeper for no reason. No, you can't insult the king to his face. When he objects, ask him how these actions fit with the style of game; if they don't, they don't happen. This breaks one of my cardinal rules of gaming (don't interfere with player agency), but sometimes it has to be done.

And if he pitches a fit, remember that the ultimate "no" is booting him from the game, but you can do so respectfully. "We've talked about this, you agreed to try this style of game, but you're going against it and being disruptive. The entire group wants to do this. It's probably better if you take a break until we go back to dungeon-crawling."

Mikemical
2017-08-09, 07:29 AM
This character he's been making is a barbarian that has been inspired by Saxton Hale from TF2. He likes to brawl and wrestle opponents, and he can do that well, but oitside of that his character has a work-in-progress backstory and no motivation.

There's your problem, you let him make a character based on a meme character.

That's like complaining about letting a player play as an animal and then say "no, you can't be Sir Bearington".

I would suggest making your player come up with the reason why their character wants to be the very best to justify their murderhobo tendencies. Maybe his dad was killed by a band of wrestling orcs, so he became a wrestling rage monster to seek revenge? I had the displeasure of playing with some guy like that. All muscle and grunting, but zero motivation.

His character had to be the strongest-est ever-est forever-est or he would throw a hissy fit moaning about the DM playing favorites. The Fighter can fight good and actually knows how to make a sound battle strategy? DM is letting the anime sneak in and playing favorites. The Paladin gets a Legacy Weapon from her God? DM is playing favorites. The Wizard studies a day and learns a new spell that is actually pretty useful? Playing favorites. Anything good that didn't involve his character was the DM playing favorites and anything good that happened to him was just 'pity'. Didn't help his character was supposed to be a Rogue, but had the temper of a Fenzied Berserker.

While other characters accomplished their goals, built up relationships with the other PCs and several NPCs, his was limited to two things: Proving everyone he was the strongest ever and didn't have any weaknesses, and rub it in everyone's face that he could survive without other people around him. So naturally when the Fighter got his own Berserk-style mercenary band, the Paladin joined an elite demon-hunting order, and the Wizard became Doctor Strange, his "flex and grunt" Rogue was all alone.

He isolated himself in-character so much that when eventually the plot advanced without him, he ragequit and left the game saying everyone was out to get him and how we were horrible people for not wanting to stick around his character, who spent every waking hour belittling and telling everyone else how weak they were.

denthor
2017-08-10, 09:14 AM
You could always have a circle outside of a tavern every tavern for dueling.

This lets him look forward to something in town . He picks a fight one on one betting goes on he gets to roll dice and experience points.

Also he does not have to roleplay in town.

Beelzebubba
2017-08-10, 09:49 AM
In other campaigns he has gotten bored while everyone else was trying to roleplay without contributing much himself so he'd do something stupid like kill a person for no reason or steal something for the sake of stealing, and he always defends it with "It's what my character would do, don't tell me how to play my character." It just turns a calm roleplaying session into GTA.

"Sorry dude, your style won't work for us. You wouldn't have fun in this campaign.

I'll let you know when it wraps up, the next one might be more your speed."

denthor
2017-08-10, 10:40 AM
To the point

"It is what my character would do. Don't tell me how to run my character "

You are the DM your job is to tell him how to run his character. Send the law against him. No healing from Lawful good or lawful neutral churches they sell him nothing. Lawful Neutral churches with an evil priest will approach with a deal.

Thieves thst have a problem with. .. will give him money for fixing it. He becomes a chaotic evil neutral evil character. Send quasits to speak with him leave his as out to dry show him what type of life evildoers get in the game. He has to grovel for healing who ever is stronger get their way.

There are great roleplaying opportunity for you.

Guizonde
2017-08-10, 02:25 PM
To the point

"It is what my character would do. Don't tell me how to run my character "

You are the DM your job is to tell him how to run his character. Send the law against him. No healing from Lawful good or lawful neutral churches they sell him nothing. Lawful Neutral churches with an evil priest will approach with a deal.

Thieves thst have a problem with. .. will give him money for fixing it. He becomes a chaotic evil neutral evil character. Send quasits to speak with him leave his as out to dry show him what type of life evildoers get in the game. He has to grovel for healing who ever is stronger get their way.

There are great roleplaying opportunity for you.

i'm just surprised the dude knows what his character would do beyond throwing a d12, honestly. or is 2d6 more optimized? whatevs, i'm sure the player knows his crunch (unfortunately for all involved).

if the dude keeps being disruptive, don't force it and tell him to sit it out. i highly doubt he'd wise up if you threw countermeasures at his character. he'd see it (justly) as petty targeted attacks, especially in the case of sending quasits or rocks. the law or an assassin's guild recruiting agent could be awesome roleplay potentially, if he can be mature about it (big if, i know).

daniel_ream
2017-08-11, 03:34 PM
You could always have a circle outside of a tavern every tavern for dueling.

Sword-Dancer series, by Jennifer Roberson. There's a subculture of sport dueling in the setting with well-established rules that are simple and require little infrastructure. You could even break out some minis and let Fighty McStabsalot run his own little combat on the side.

Minty
2017-08-12, 11:11 AM
I played in a game a few years ago with a group of players recruited via a meetup, and we realised too late that one guy was like this. After a few sessions, it became clear that everyone was on the same page except this guy. What's worse, he was extremely arrogant and abrasive, and frequently interrupted and talked over other players, especially if they tried to do any non-combat roleplaying that he wanted to skip over so he could "get to the next fight". Because of his attitude and inability to tolerate differences of opinion on any matter, nobody was brave enough to talk to him about it, so in the end we just pretended the game was cancelled due to everyone having other commitments, then we carried on without him. It may seem cowardly, but I think it's a pretty effective way to get rid of problem players without having to tell them they suck (which is no fun for anyone).

Jay R
2017-08-13, 11:12 PM
Emphasizing this again. The question isn't "how do I deal with a player who doesn't roleplay" as much as it is "how do I deal with a player who acts disruptive when bored?"

Treat him as such, and don't let him get bored.

Step one is to talk to him. "Look, George, I know you don't like the talky parts, but the rest of us do. And sometimes they happen. So could you stop trampling on our fun when they come up? You're a great ally in combat, but you've also caused some problems and prevented my character from doing the diplomacy he's built for. I'll try to speed it up, and find something else for you to do, but I'd like to play that part of the game without you murdering everybody I'm trying to get information from."

Then find something for him to do. "George, it looks like we're going to be doing politics for awhile. Why don't you put the pizzas in the oven and bring out the chips and hot sauce?"

Treat it like a fact of life, and try to manage it, to his benefit as well as your own.