Advice wanted - Group Cleric is a drag, how do I talk to them?

[Twigwit]

I've been running Curse of Strahd for a group and have had some issues with one of the players in my group, a Scourge Aasimar Grave Cleric. The player has, over the course of a year, failed to internalize fundamentals about their character or even how the game is played. It has reached the point that it surpasses being an annoyance to actively hampering their team. Let me site a specific example from a recent game. Minor CoS encounter spoilers ahead:

Party encounters a bunch of Revenants, diplomacy breaks down, initiative is rolled and combat starts.

ROUND 1: Cleric uses BA to turn on their Sun Blade, instantly putting the party's Drow at Disadvantage against every opponent due to Sunlight Sensitivity. Moves into melee with the Revenants and makes a melee attack, despite having Sacred Flame as a cantrip and having only a 12 in both Strength and Dexterity. Attack misses.

ROUND 2: Makes another melee attack. Hits.

ROUND 3: Makes another melee attack. Misses. Is brought to 0 HP by repeated attacks after turn is over, but healing worded by the party Bard before round 4.

ROUND 4: Gets up, heals self with a 3rd level cure wounds, then declares they make a melee attack before being told there's only 1 action in a turn.

ROUND 5: Attempts to Turn Undead. After being told the Revenants aren't effected (they are immune), declares they'll do a melee attack instead before being told there's only 1 action in a turn.

ROUND 6: Attempts to Turn Undead again. After being told the Revenants still aren't effected, declares they'll activate their Radiant Consumption racial ability before being told it costs an action and there is only 1 action in a turn. Is asked if they have any spells that us a BA instead of an action, like spiritual weapon. Player discovers that they have spiritual weapon on their spells prepared and casts it. It hits a Revenant.

ROUND 7: Attempts to Turn Undead again. After being told that 7th level clerics only have 2 uses of Channel Divinity per short rest, elects to use their Radiant Consumption racial ability. Is reminded that spiritual weapon is active, and uses it to hit a Revenant.

ROUND 8: Casts spiritual guardians, which the player has just discovered on their spells prepared sheet. Party and myself expresses frustration at player for not knowing they had it prepared, not knowing what the spell actually does, and for deploying it when the majority of enemies are already dead. Uses spiritual weapon, hits. Makes a concentration check at the end of their turn due to Radiant Consumption dealing 1 point of damage to them, succeeds.

Combat ends.

The above generally plays out the same in any given combat, with the Drow always gaining Disadvantage for the rest of the encounter and the Cleric making ineffective melee swipes while ignoring their spells prepared, presumably out of ignorance. This probably gives the impression of a very inexperienced player but in reality this player has been playing D&D for at least a decade. It isn't like this player is hostile to the group or other PCs, nor is their role playing poor, it's just they display a lack of attention to any aspect of the combat and haven't learned anything over the year we've been playing Curse of Strahd. My usual policy with this kind of thing is to simply let the player learn from their mistakes, but they have had ample opportunity to do so over the past year yet they display no change.

Since the Drow has spent about a dozen or so sessions in a row being rendered nigh on useless by the Cleric for no real tactical gain I've had enough of letting one player's sloppy behavior damage another player's enjoyment. This has to be addressed, I simply don't know how to go about this. Should I ask the player to play more tactical or ask them to read their own spells before the session? Should I talk to this player one on one or is this a party wide discussion? How would you guys handle this?

[ad_hoc]

Yeah, there is an obligation for people to put in a minimum effort to learn and play the game. A year is far too gracious. Sounds like it is time for them to go.

As for the Drow, I don't think that race is appropriate for CoS. I would allow a new character as I don't think it is fair to expect people to not engage with key things about the adventure.

[Vorpalchicken]

He could adjust the radius of the sun blade sunlight to 5 feet .

Sounds like he'd rather play a Fighter.

I guess you could ask if he's interested in the game. Maybe he only comes for the snacks.

[Jerrykhor]

Sit down with the player privately, and talk to him/her about two things: Expectations and Etiquette.

Expectations would be things like knowledge of rules, spells and class abilities of your character. A player is expected to know those at the bare minimum. Its no excuse not to know them nowadays, with the help of phone apps for spells and rules being simpler than ever before.

Player Etiquette is basically table manners, playing the game in way that is not disruptive or unfun for others. Making a decently competent character also counts as this, because at some point, it doesn't make sense to be tolerating an incompetent adventurer who doesn't contribute to the party.

[Zhorn]

Insert a deck of many things.
Rig the deck so the cleric draws the knight, followed by the Donjon/Void.
The player now has a 4th level fighter, and the 'cleric' is whisked away and sealed into the Heart of Sorrow.
The Fighter's motivation is they are compelled to seek out the cleric and free them from the prison, which should align with most angles for tackling Curse of Strahd.
Let them draw (rigged) one last time as the fighter, giving them the Sun card (adjust xp for them to catch up to where the group's level is).
Declare the deck crumbles to ash.

Horrible tactics, and a cruel move as a DM (which I don't really advocate), but if the scenario you describe is accurate, then it does sound like they think with a fighter brain and not a cleric brain. :smallconfused:

[TyGuy]

As for the Drow, I don't think that race is appropriate for CoS
1 why does the derp cleric have the sun blade?

2 why hasn't the drow figured out a light reducing apparel by now? Or couldn't the DM throw him a bone with an item?

Goggles of night? Meet goggles of day.

[Corran]

1) Tell the cleric that producing the light from sunblade is not always a good idea since it hurts the drow pc. When there is no benefit in prodcing the light, but the cleric still does, you can pause the game and remind them that this is not a good idea. Sounds an easy fix, but if it doesn't work, you can always make the sunblade sentient and choose when it emits light and when not.

2) Then either suggest to the player to pick a simpler class (a fighter perhaps), or have someone write down and give to the cleric sth like this: First round: spirit guardians or bless, second round: sacred flame (+spiritual weapon), third round: sacred flame. Or just do nothing and scale down encounter difficulty a bit if necessary.

[Willie the Duck]

Since the Drow has spent about a dozen or so sessions in a row being rendered nigh on useless by the Cleric for no real tactical gain I've had enough of letting one player's sloppy behavior damage another player's enjoyment. This has to be addressed, I simply don't know how to go about this. Should I ask the player to play more tactical or ask them to read their own spells before the session? Should I talk to this player one on one or is this a party wide discussion? How would you guys handle this?

You've answered your own question. Address the situation. I would do it solo.

I would also use the drow* as part of the explanation why the cleric's player is not merely playing sub-optimally, but actively making life less fun for other. Make clear that you are trying to make sure everyone is having fun. Make it known that everyone can clearly see that they aren't getting into the mechanics of the cleric class as it exists in 5e (a person playing a cleric who has to be reminded to check which spells they have prepared is not adapting to the class as it exists). Also make clear that, one year in, a player attempting to take two actions during a turn, and leaving it to others to police them**, is straddling the line between burdening the rest of the group with extra duties and trying to get away with something.
*Although, honestly, someone deciding to play a drow is taking upon themselves the responsibility of figuring out how to circumvent the race's disadvantage, particularly in a campaign where 'the good guys will want to be using light-based magic' should be self-evident.
**I had this with someone entering 5e for the first time regarding bonus actions. They kept trying to drink potions, draw weapons/interact with objects (they were not a thief rogue), etc. with bonus actions. Eventually others started saying, "Knock it off! It is not my job to police this for you. Do not attempt to do things with a bonus action again unless you can explain to people why you think it is a bonus action ability!" It was not the best day in that group.

However, after that, I would turn it around, and make it clear that you are concerned with their fun. It doesn't sound like they really want to be playing a cleric as they exist in 5e. Suggest that a Champion Fighter with Acolyte background (and maybe Healer and/or Inspiring Leader feats) or Paladin would both be better at swinging sunblades, if they wanted a cleric concept but less resource management.

[thrdeye]

You've answered your own question. Address the situation. I would do it solo.

I would also use the drow* as part of the explanation why the cleric's player is not merely playing sub-optimally, but actively making life less fun for other. Make clear that you are trying to make sure everyone is having fun. Make it known that everyone can clearly see that they aren't getting into the mechanics of the cleric class as it exists in 5e (a person playing a cleric who has to be reminded to check which spells they have prepared is not adapting to the class as it exists). Also make clear that, one year in, a player attempting to take two actions during a turn, and leaving it to others to police them**, is straddling the line between burdening the rest of the group with extra duties and trying to get away with something.
*Although, honestly, someone deciding to play a drow is taking upon themselves the responsibility of figuring out how to circumvent the race's disadvantage, particularly in a campaign where 'the good guys will want to be using light-based magic' should be self-evident.
**I had this with someone entering 5e for the first time regarding bonus actions. They kept trying to drink potions, draw weapons/interact with objects (they were not a thief rogue), etc. with bonus actions. Eventually others started saying, "Knock it off! It is not my job to police this for you. Do not attempt to do things with a bonus action again unless you can explain to people why you think it is a bonus action ability!" It was not the best day in that group.

However, after that, I would turn it around, and make it clear that you are concerned with their fun. It doesn't sound like they really want to be playing a cleric as they exist in 5e. Suggest that a Champion Fighter with Acolyte background (and maybe Healer and/or Inspiring Leader feats) or Paladin would both be better at swinging sunblades, if they wanted a cleric concept but less resource management.

Took the words right out of my mouth. This guy is an idiot, but there are some mitigating factors such as the Drow player's decision to use a race that would be disadvantageous in the campaign (no pun intended). In addition, it seems that some or all of the group gave a freakin' lightsaber to a player who was already confused and expected them not to use it. I think a Sun Blade falls handily into the group of items that are cool enough to be used even in suboptimal situations.

And really, if the Drow situation is handled and the Cleric has Bless up, using the Sun Blade isn't that bad especially against undead. 12 in an attack stat is workable with a +2 weapon and +1d4 to hit. That's +4 minimum. The party members would be getting a nice buff and if the Cleric is also using Spiritual Weapon they'll be doing respectable damage. Give the Cleric a shield and have them take an ASI in whatever works for their armor and they'll do fine in melee. If, of course, that's what they want to do.

My suggestions? Give the Drow a trenchcoat and shades or something. Explain to the Cleric what they should be doing in combat and run some mock combats to let them practice. If they don't get it, new character time. If they still don't get it after a session or two, it's time to seriously question whether they even want to be playing the game.

[Grod_The_Giant]

That's a problem I've been struggling with in one of my groups as well-- players not understanding the basics of the game or their characters even after weeks or months of play. It's... not easy. Cheatsheets can help, switching to a simpler version of the character can help, but at a certain point there's not really anything you can do.

[Keravath]

1) The sunblade emits bright light in a 15' radius and dim light to 30' radius which can both be reduced. It's a DM call but I would personally say the drow would only be negatively affected if within 15' of the cleric where there is bright sunlight or when attacking targets within that radius of the cleric.

For example, do you apply sunlight sensitivity in a shady forest? If you do then the drow could be affected within the dim light radius of the sword and if you don't then perhaps only the bright light radius is appropriate. However, from the sounds of it, you may have been ruling that as soon as the sword comes out the entire battlefield is lit by sunlight which is not what the sword description says.

Usually, the attackers are a little more spread out than 10-15' so I don't see how the drow would be negatively impacted in every combat. (You also don't mention what class the drow is ... but drow can cast darkness ... if they cast darkness then they can't see their opponents but they also can't see the drow so advantage and disadvantage cancel out leaving the drow with straight rolls to hit ... though it does interfere with spellcasting.

2) Your example has the cleric trying to turn undead three turns in a row after being informed on the first attempt that the creatures are immune. Honestly, this makes no sense. This has nothing to do with the player learning from mistakes. It represents either a complete lack of attention, some sort of short term memory issue, someone trying to role play a cleric with very low intelligence, someone who is otherwise cognitively impaired (drugs, alcohol, sleep deprivation, distracted on their phone, distracted by other social interactions). Basically, the series of events has nothing to do with playing D&D for a year but other outside the game factors that the OP hasn't mentioned. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions on this one without more input from the OP.

In addition, the other players AND the DM should have reminded the player that the creatures were immune to being turned since it is clear that the cleric didn't seem to remember this on their own and allowed him to choose a different action rather than forcing the second attempt to turn undead which action the character would never have taken.

3) Presumably your group has been playing for more than a year. Why don't the other players remind the cleric to cast spirit guardians in the first round? Why don't they remind the cleric to cast spiritual weapon? Why do they let the cleric attempt to turn undead three times without saying anything? Again, it just doesn't make any sense as written within the context available. Are you playing by email or post? It is hard to see this type of interaction occurring in person at any of the tables I have played at. Comments and suggestions to other players can be made in polite and respectful ways. They may still choose not to follow them but again the entire set of events outlined in the OP seems to be missing some significant elements.

[GlenSmash!]

I have a player like this at my table. Fortunately the player is playing a champion, so it's a lot less frustration. Still she's ignoring magical Longsword she picked up early in the game to use 2 mundane battleaxes, which I find frustrating.

Anyway the best this I think to do is have a talk about how certain decisions are making the game less fun for other players. This player may also be frustrated by the overwhelming options they have and would respond well to a simpler character to. But you'll only find out by talking about it.

[Twigwit]

1)(snip) ...However, from the sounds of it, you may have been ruling that as soon as the sword comes out the entire battlefield is lit by sunlight which is not what the sword description says.

We play on roll20 and use an aura overlay for the Sun Blade, so there's no ambiguity as to who is in sunlight. The Cleric will go to meet melee oriented enemies in a slapfight, so that 15 foot radius gets crowded pretty quickly.


2) Your example has the cleric trying to turn undead three turns in a row after being informed on the first attempt that the creatures are immune. Honestly, this makes no sense...

For clarity's sake, I specifically told everyone that the enemies had succeeded their saving throws and were unaffected, not that they had outright immunity. There were about six or seven of them at this time and I figured the PC's would get the hint about not even one of them getting a fluke failed save. Apparently I was wrong.


3) Presumably your group has been playing for more than a year. Why don't the other players remind the cleric to cast spirit guardians in the first round?

My players do communicate, but they don't know what is or isn't on each others spell sheets at all times. Things like "can you dispel this?" or "do you have a utility spell for that?" are regular questions all the players ask each other to overcome problems, but that's different than bossing other players into taking specific spells and using them a certain way in combat, it's viewed as hijacking their character. Most of my players don't need constant reminders and don't want them, but this one does, hence the problem.

[Willie the Duck]

For clarity's sake, I specifically told everyone that the enemies had succeeded their saving throws and were unaffected, not that they had outright immunity. There were about six or seven of them at this time and I figured the PC's would get the hint about not even one of them getting a fluke failed save. Apparently I was wrong.

Do you normally tell your players that opponents succeeded, or that they were not phased/affected? I normally (for 'save for no effect' spells and powers) say, 'the <opponents> are not affected.' That leaves it more neutral. Saying that they succeeded their saving throws strongly implies that there was a chance that they could have failed.


My players do communicate, but they don't know what is or isn't on each others spell sheets at all times. Things like "can you dispel this?" or "do you have a utility spell for that?" are regular questions all the players ask each other to overcome problems, but that's different than bossing other players into taking specific spells and using them a certain way in combat, it's viewed as hijacking their character. Most of my players don't need constant reminders and don't want them, but this one does, hence the problem.

Okay, even your own language here betrays a real ambivalence about this. 'bossing other players,' 'hijacking their character'-- I think we can all agree that everyone isn't supposed to know, much less care or voice opinions upon, every darn thing that another character has prepared. That's not what this is. This is a matter of people routinely communicating: "oh, your rogue is fighting in melee and not withdrawing, do you remember you can use a bonus action to do so without drawing an OA?" "You said you were down to less than 10 hp, have you used up your Second Wind?" etc. We are not telling you that you have to have such stuff occurring in your game, merely that the absence thereof seems unusual.

Regardless, I think we've arrived at a pseudo-consensus: talk to the player, find out what's up, whether they are playing what they want, and how to help him at the very least not make the rest of the table have to keep them from attempting multiple actions he can't make in the same turn (and maybe even stop torch-blinding the drow).

[Twigwit]

The lack of party spell and combo talk probably comes from me being the DM this time in our player group. I'm the optimizer of the lot (if my signature didn't give it away already) and was usually the one coordinating the combat effort in previous campaigns as a player. There were a few times players got annoyed with me over it so I've been consciously not letting my own views of optimal performance clash with my duties as a DM for this campaign.

I do agree the consensus seems like the way to go. Thanks for the input all, hopefully the issues will end shortly.

[MThurston]

The rules part and how to play is crazy. They should understand this.

Playing a Dark Elf is a terrible idea if the group works above ground. That is on the Dark Elf. It's also on the DM for giving the dumb kid a shiny blade.

[TyGuy]

It's also on the DM for giving the dumb kid a shiny blade.
The shiny blade in question is part of the adventure. It's up to the players to share/distribute loot.

I asked but didn't get an answer, but I'm still curious as to why the table was ok with giving the derp cleric the sunblade. Was there really no better PC than someone with a +1 attack mod stat? Sounds like the table is complacent in this detrimental player.

[Willie the Duck]

The shiny blade in question is part of the adventure. It's up to the players to share/distribute loot.

I asked but didn't get an answer, but I'm still curious as to why the table was ok with giving the derp cleric the sunblade. Was there really no better PC than someone with a +1 attack mod stat? Sounds like the table is complacent in this detrimental player.

Cleric might have been the only person who hadn't yet gotten a magic item. Now that I think about it, don't you have to be proficient in long or short swords to be proficient in the weapon? Is he not just +1 based on attack mod stats, but +1 to-hit overall?

[Twigwit]

I asked but didn't get an answer, but I'm still curious as to why the table was ok with giving the derp cleric the sunblade.

Woops, didn’t meant to ignore you. No one else wanted it. The Barbadian has GWM and a swanky greatsword, the Ranger has Sharpshooter and stays away from melee, the Bard avoids melee like the plague to hold concentration on stuff and the Drow Warlock doesn’t want it for obvious reasons. I think it makes more sense as a backup weapon for the Ranger or Bard, but like you said it’s their responsibility to distribute the loot.

[Man_Over_Game]

Consider talking to him about changing his class. Maybe his playstyle has gained him favor from a War deity and extends an offer to receive his blessing, thereby making him into a War Cleric?

The problem seems to be that he's not acting like a Grave Cleric (Stand back, support the team) and so it feels like he's playing poorly. However, what he's doing isn't much different than what the Barbarian is probably doing.

Rather than trying to change the person, change the game. If a War Cleric was running around, slicing up baddies with a glowing sword, nobody would think that was weird or poorly played.

[stoutstien]

Consider talking to him about changing his class. Maybe his playstyle has gained him favor from a War deity and extends an offer to receive his blessing, thereby making him into a War Cleric?

The problem seems to be that he's not acting like a Grave Cleric (Stand back, support the team) and so it feels like he's playing poorly. However, what he's doing isn't much different than what the Barbarian is probably doing.

Rather than trying to change the person, change the game. If a War Cleric was running around, slicing up baddies with a glowing sword, nobody would think that was weird or poorly played.
Agreed or even paladin. Less spell slot management also. I've found the lay of hands a better concept for newer players to grasp than trying to pick the right recovery spell to use.

[Demonslayer666]

Reach out to them personally, over the phone or meet with them one on one.

It sounds to me like the player of the cleric needs it pointed out to them that it is very ineffective to attack with the sunblade. They may have the false impression that it is something more than what it is, and they think they should be using it. Ask them why and break it down for them.

It also seems to me that they are not enjoying playing the cleric. They don't care enough to bother learning what their character can do. You will have to make the call if it's lack of ability, or disinterest. You can help them, or find something they are more interested in playing.

IMO, a character should be able to easily tell the difference between a target ignoring something (immune) and a target making a save. I would describe immune by saying something like, "they completely ignore it", where the save may be something like, "they struggle, but dig deep and press forward."

[SirGraystone]

Woops, didn’t meant to ignore you. No one else wanted it. The Barbadian has GWM and a swanky greatsword, the Ranger has Sharpshooter and stays away from melee, the Bard avoids melee like the plague to hold concentration on stuff and the Drow Warlock doesn’t want it for obvious reasons. I think it makes more sense as a backup weapon for a the Ranger or Bard, but like you said it’s their responsibility to distribute the loot.

And the players should be allow to distribute the loot as they please of course, when running Out of the Abyss our group found Dawnbringer (A sun blade with other abilities), when noone seem to be interested by it, my drow bard quickly grab it and keep it safe in its scabbard so the light wouldn't bother him :-D

[Mercurias]

I'd honestly sit down with the player and ask if they might want to play a more physical-oriented character.

It also sounds like there isn't a lot of communication at the table if it's been a year and the Drow's player hasn't spoken up. A lot of the time when I see these threads (and when I posted one of my own), the big issue was one of communication. That isn't intended to be a slight against you, but as a general thing it helps to keep communication in mind.

If the player wants to stick with their Edgelord Cleric, I might also walk the person through the important of planning their actions ahead of time while the fight goes on, and maybe offer to help them put together a short list of go-to spells so they can more easily plan and execute their actions.

[JackPhoenix]

Playing a Dark Elf is a terrible idea if the group works above ground. That is on the Dark Elf. It's also on the DM for giving the dumb kid a shiny blade.

Unless you play CoS. Sun never shines in Barovia as long as Strahd lives. The "shiny blade" is an important part of CoS story.

[Agent-KI7KO]

...yeah that’s very poor form from your player. Swap him into a War Cleric ASAP.


Unless you play CoS. Sun never shines in Barovia as long as Strahd lives. The "shiny blade" is an important part of CoS story.

You’ve never met my DM. Apparently the sight of my Kobold Bard spreading smiles and laughter was enough to make Strahd declare war on my Kobold specifically, by constantly making a 5ft square of sunlight constantly follow my Kobold... even at night.