PDA

View Full Version : Player Help What do you do when another player gets upset about the way you've built your toon?



MonkeySage
2018-03-03, 11:43 PM
Just got through an argument with a fellow player in our newest campaign. He hasn't built his character with crafting in mind. I on the other hand built mine specifically for that purpose. Small things like wondrous items, but also large things like constructs. My character is an artisan, through and through.

Now, back when we were creating our characters, nobody said anything about this being off the table, and the gm ok'd the idea when I told him I wanted to build constructs. In my mind, if crafting was going to be an issue, it should have been brought up from the beginning.

Crafting takes time and resources, but I never intended to do it during an adventure. I intended to use my downtime for it.

Xuc Xac
2018-03-03, 11:57 PM
So what is the problem? What did you argue about? Are they upset that you call your character a toon? That's understandable.

MonkeySage
2018-03-04, 12:16 AM
Space use, lol. I wanted to type character, but that didn't fit in the title. Probably could have shortened to "char"...

Well, basically, our party of 4 has one other character that's shown an interest in crafting.

Like I said, though, the argument was over the fact i've built my character around crafting. I've spent 3 out of 7 feats on it, and intend to use my downtime to make stuff like flying carpets and golems. His character is not at all a crafter, and he thinks that my crafting is going to interfere with the adventuring.

Vizzerdrix
2018-03-04, 01:38 AM
So long as the DM approved it, I don't see a problem. The most I'd do is keep him and the DM after one session and let him get it out of his system. I most certainly wouldn't allow it to affect how the character was built or played.

FreddyNoNose
2018-03-04, 01:59 AM
Just got through an argument with a fellow player in our newest campaign. He hasn't built his character with crafting in mind. I on the other hand built mine specifically for that purpose. Small things like wondrous items, but also large things like constructs. My character is an artisan, through and through.

Now, back when we were creating our characters, nobody said anything about this being off the table, and the gm ok'd the idea when I told him I wanted to build constructs. In my mind, if crafting was going to be an issue, it should have been brought up from the beginning.

Crafting takes time and resources, but I never intended to do it during an adventure. I intended to use my downtime for it.

You could kill his character and let him create a new one with this new information in mind! :smallsmile:

jojo
2018-03-04, 02:28 AM
It's your character. There's nothing for another player to get upset about.

Wraith
2018-03-04, 05:17 AM
By "crafting will interfere with adventuring", what do you mean please?

Are they concerned that they will OOC have to spend a lot of time sat waiting for you to pour through splatbooks while you design your next invention? That's an understandable RL concern because no one wants to sit and watch someone else read a book for an hour, but you can very easily reassure him that you'll do all your downtime stuff during downtime and that he'll never see it happen.

Are they concerned that they will IC have to sit and wait for weeks while another character is building something? Also understandable from an IC point of view; some characters actually WANT to go and save the world, or aren't interested in spending a month 'training' while another character locks themselves away in a lab and refuses to come out. You'd have to talk this one over with your GM to keep their character entertained while yours is doing other things, but if they're completely unwilling to accept the GM going "Okay, so you spend a week doing stuff, you're now all done - what next?" then that is neither your fault or failure.

Are they concerned that you are going to be build a DR50 golem and bring it to a CR3 fight, thus dominating the encounter and leaving them with nothing to do? Again understandable - unlikely, but I also would not want to come to a D&D game where one player had built better, faster, stronger versions of the other PC's and I just had to spectate. You would quite easily moderate yourself in this, even if the GM didn't, just be considerate of the other party members I guess.

Are they concerned because that's not how THEY would have made a character, or because they're demanding a traditional Fighter-Healer-Rogue-Wizard party and you aren't enabling that with your way of enjoying yourself? Also understandable - they're That Guy and anything you do to appease them will lead to worse behaviour, so ignore it, enjoy your game the way you want to play it, and advise them to do the same. :smalltongue:

PrismCat21
2018-03-04, 06:11 AM
There's nothing forcing him to make use of anything you create. If he as a problem with your build, too bad, it as nothing to do with him.
I assume you'll be making at least a few things for other party members as well as yourself. Just don't give any to him, or charge him more than market price for what he wants.
The DM approved your character at the beginning. That's all that's needed.

dps
2018-03-04, 09:39 AM
By "crafting will interfere with adventuring", what do you mean please?


I had assumed that it meant the other player was concerned that MonkeySage's character was so focused on crafting that he couldn't hold his own in a fight. But yeah, there are other interpretations. However, this:


If he as a problem with your build, too bad, it as nothing to do with him... ...The DM approved your character at the beginning. That's all that's needed

is quite correct. It's MonkeySage's character, and the other players have no say in his build.

Rhedyn
2018-03-04, 09:51 AM
He seems like one of "those players" where any mechanic that interferes with his sensibilities is "bad" and anyone who uses it is also "bad".

Disregard such people and don't ever let him GM since he is building up bad feelings towards the group.

ko_sct
2018-03-04, 10:22 AM
I'd also say that we need more information on what upset him and what was said.

Is he fearfull that your going to go full minionmancer and show up to the fights with so many constructs that 85% of the combat will be spent watching you roll dices ? (Actually happened to me in a game. The player was told to figure something out to make his turn much faster or he'd lose all his minions)

Does he think the pacing of the game will be screwed up by having several crafter ? This hasn't happen in any of my games but I've seen the pacing suffer somewhat by groups taking an 8h rest during time-sensitives missiin to regain spells, he might be fearfull of taking a 2 week crafting break during an epic conquest adventure.

There's also the possibility of getting overshadowed. Are you crafting items to make everyone better or to replace character ? (sorry rogue, we find that your role is better replaced by a wand of knock and this bag of infinite monkey that can trigger traps)

Tanarii
2018-03-04, 11:45 AM
From a recent 5e form thread, it's become apparent to me that the idea of crafting making the entire in-game party sit on "pause" doing nothing while the crafter does his thing, even if that downtime is entirely hand waved away and takes practically zero table time to do, is a problem for some people. It's possible the other player either doesn't want his character to sit on his ass while this PC does his thing and the time is hand waved. (I don't understand this, but it seems to be a thing.)

Conversely there are others who feel they cannot play crafters at a typical table, because there is almost always insufficient downtime in the campaign. Creating sufficient downtime would requiring significant changes. It's possible the player is used to time being an important resource, that downtime is uncommon and valuable, and is concerned that a crafting character will force remove downtime as a resource. (This one makes a lot more sense to me. I like it when time is a meaningful resource, including downtime.)

Grek
2018-03-04, 12:28 PM
Talk to them with your mouth words and ask why crafting is a problem. Then, when they tell you what the problem is, promise not to do the thing that they have a problem with.

icefractal
2018-03-04, 03:37 PM
From a recent 5e form thread, it's become apparent to me that the idea of crafting making the entire in-game party sit on "pause" doing nothing while the crafter does his thing, even if that downtime is entirely hand waved away and takes practically zero table time to do, is a problem for some people. It's possible the other player either doesn't want his character to sit on his ass while this PC does his thing and the time is hand waved. (I don't understand this, but it seems to be a thing.)Yeah, I've seen that too. Or, for example, people wanting to set off for the next destination (not time sensitive) the same day they got into town, without resting, even though it would literally take less than a minute of real-time. Not sure why - I think in some cases, it's a form of spotlight-grabbing: their characters have no need for rest or downtime, so making everyone else run ragged shows off how prepared they are.

Downtimes rules, such as Pathfinder has, can give the non-crafters something to do. However, they also cause it to consume much more real-time. So if the issue is that he feels left out IC, then use them. If it's that he wants to get back to the adventure faster, definitely don't use them!

As for downtime making sense IC - I think it does more often than not. Sure, sometimes the whole campaign is a race against time, and in those cases don't be a crafter, but in general it's more plausible that a group has a series of adventures over the course of several years, with time passing between them, rather than going from novices to legendary heroes in the course of a month.

TheYell
2018-03-04, 03:38 PM
What was said in the argument? Cause that can be its own problem.

I myself would not have a lot to say arguing about this, because it's my character, and the GM agreed.

Tanarii
2018-03-04, 05:26 PM
I myself would not have a lot to say arguing about this, because it's my character, and the GM agreed.
That's my attitude when it's my character too. Who are you to tell me anything about my character?

But when it's not my character, I can see where sometimes it helps to have a good understanding of where the other person is coming from. At least that way when you dismiss them as telling you what to do, so they can just go something unspeakable an animal ... you'll know you're not really trampling on them, forcing the entire party to adapt to your special character, by insisting on playing it. :smallamused:

TheYell
2018-03-04, 06:24 PM
Yes, if the TABLE objects to your build, that might be a problem of fitting in with the party's optimum anti-vampire plans, etc.

But just one guy? I mean, what if the 2 crafters insisted he build something more suitable for extended downtime?

The OP complained of tensions and I think if we had more information about the argument they had already, we might address the points raised.

Mr Beer
2018-03-04, 06:26 PM
Talk to them with your mouth words and ask why crafting is a problem. Then, when they tell you what the problem is, promise not to do the thing that they have a problem with.

This but also if the problem is unreasonable ('I don't want you crafting because I want that to be my thing') then use your mouth words to suggest that they harden up.

dps
2018-03-04, 07:42 PM
Talk to them with your mouth words and ask why crafting is a problem. Then, when they tell you what the problem is, promise not to do the thing that they have a problem with.

I can't agree with this in general terms. If they have a specific problem with it that you agree is a reasonable concern, then, sure, don't be an ass about it--promise them that you'll avoid the situation they are concerned about. But otherwise, I don't think you should give another player that sort of veto power over your character's build or behavior.

Mordaedil
2018-03-05, 08:31 AM
Talk to them indepth about how you plan to handle crafting and assure them it isn't going to be an issue and emphasise the cool stuff you can make for them at reduced cost.

Jay R
2018-03-05, 01:04 PM
Talk to them with your mouth words and ask why crafting is a problem. Then, when they tell you what the problem is, promise not to do the thing that they have a problem with.

If and only if they have given you veto over an aspect of what their character can do.

Try to get along, certainly. If you can resolve it by being understanding, that's great. But another player cannot veto my plans for my character, for exactly the same reasons I can't veto his plans for his character.

Kaptin Keen
2018-03-05, 01:47 PM
He seems like one of "those players" where any mechanic that interferes with his sensibilities is "bad" and anyone who uses it is also "bad".

Disregard such people and don't ever let him GM since he is building up bad feelings towards the group.

Or you know - the opposite. I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone, but there seems to be an even chance the OP is 'that guy'. The guy who will play his own game in total disregard of what everyone else wants - which is fine, provided the rest of the group isn't expecting to be built with cooperation in mind.

I don't care either way, and both setups can work just fine. But .. they don't mix very well =)

Grek
2018-03-05, 03:36 PM
Better no game than a bad game. When you say you're not going to do the thing they're worried about, you can either do it by not doing the thing, OR by doing it in a campaign that doesn't involve such a spoilsport.

icefractal
2018-03-05, 06:49 PM
Better no game than a bad game. When you say you're not going to do the thing they're worried about, you can either do it by not doing the thing, OR by doing it in a campaign that doesn't involve such a spoilsport.Eh ... while you can say that their hypothetical bad feelings about a crafter existing might make it a bad game, you can say the same thing about the OP's hypothetical bad feelings about not being able to play one - it's really an equivalent situation. And IME, people can usually "get over it" just fine. So while I'd listen to why they had an issue, I don't think it should be an assumption that one player can veto something the rest of the group is fine with.