I’m a Mystic. Now everyone hates me!?

[Vhagar]

Hi there. So pretty silly title but I am having an issue with my current campaign and would love some feedback.

Right now I am playing a mystic who I have designed to have quite a bit of utility in role play.

I have the highest intelligence in the group and with my mystic perks I have a ton of advantage while gathering information.

While unintentional, I have become sort of the unofficial “leader” of the group. Make no mistake. I am not the actual leader; Just the “idea man” so to speak. The last four major strategies I concocted (spanning from infiltrating enemy bases, going undercover in a brothel to possibly initiating a prison riot (coming soon ^_^)

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.

I apologized about it but silently took umbrage at the assertion. I don’t think it’s fair to punish someone for being proactive, coming up with unique and interesting strategies and pursuing plot points and side quests.

I don’t want to alienate my friends of course, but also I want to have fun. Trying to strike a balance between utilizing my characters abilities as well as my own personal imagination and problem-solving skills while not seeming like an overzealous *******.

On that same token though. I often find that if I don’t initiate plot points or don’t suggest places to go or things to do everyone just ends up just going on shopping trips and role-playing getting drunk at bars. 🤦*♂️


most of what I’m saying in this thread is just me being frustrated and complaining, but I am actually looking for some solid advice. Should I just swallow the bitter pill and become more of a wallflower so my friends can take the proverbial reigns or is there a way to be more inclusive without having to become a shrinking violet?

[Dork_Forge]

How long how you played with them all? Do they want the same kind of game you do?

In general I'd just say allow them to speak, maybe ask directly what they think the group should do and don't push your own ideas if they have a direction they'd like to go.

[MaxWilson]

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.

...On that same token though. I often find that if I don’t initiate plot points or don’t suggest places to go or things to do everyone just ends up just going on shopping trips and role-playing getting drunk at bars. 🤦*♂️

most of what I’m saying in this thread is just me being frustrated and complaining, but I am actually looking for some solid advice. Should I just swallow the bitter pill and become more of a wallflower so my friends can take the proverbial reigns or is there a way to be more inclusive without having to become a shrinking violet?

It's tough because I can't actually see you, and because this is a people problem not a gaming problem, but if you're serious about wanting to learn better ways to interact you will have to do a lot of listening first.

One concrete tip I can give you for being more inclusive is to seek unanimity: when you're trying to get 100% of people on board with a plan before taking action, instead of just a majority, studies have shown that marginalized people are more likely to have their voices heard. If you mentally keep track of who hasn't spoken up yet and ask, "Barb, we haven't heard from you yet. How do you feel about leaving this tavern and going to look for trouble in the mine shaft?" you may learn more about what your friends really want out of the game.

Good luck.

[Arkhios]

First of all, it would be best to clear some air and discuss about your concerns with the whole group. Call for a time out before you start your next session.
If they're adults or at least mature enough to have an intelligent conversation with, it shouldn't be an issue to anyone involved.

Personally, judging from what you said, I wouldn't say you've done anything wrong, per sé. Still, if you're always the one who comes up with the plans and others have practically no say on the matter, it can feel a bit unsettling, and domineering. Especially if the group always ends up going with your plan. Even if they are actually good ones.

One thing you could do is to allow your fellow players speak first. If they're accustomed to your previous approach and shy about starting the discussion for a plan, you can, as Dork_Forge said, gauge the other players into speaking what they think what should be done. Listen carefully to their ideas, and only afterwards, if your own ideas are different, tell them what you think should be done. But don't push it as if it was the best possible approach. The game is not exactly about winning, but rather about having fun and enjoying your time together. Besides, even a failed plan can be fun sometimes. Especially if, through creative thinking on the fly, you end up on top anyway.
Give the other players a chance to decide which plan to follow. If they end up choosing your plan, well hey, it's not on you. Giving others freedom of choice is a good thing. It might start small, but eventually the other players will grow more confident and participate more readily instead of submitting to someone else's plans without questioning them.

PS. I feel I should add that being the mediator rather than the judge is the better approach. Guide the others to participate, and like MaxWilson said, if someone in your group still remains silent, ask them specifically what they think. Involve everyone in the conversation.

As for playing your character in combat, and planning your character in advance, it's kind of bad to try and be able to handle all situations on your own, even if your intent is to act as sort of a "Jack of All Trades" -support. If you do everything better than others in their own fields, you outshine their characters and that feels really bad.

[qube]

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.

I apologized about it but silently took umbrage at the assertion. I don’t think it’s fair to punish someone for being proactive, coming up with unique and interesting strategies and pursuing plot points and side quests. But there in lies the problem, doesn't it.

Allow me to paint you a simple scenario:


"I one shot all the enemies we encounter, and the rest of the party doesn't like me? How's that? We're supposed to kill the enemy, right?"

You say "I don’t think it’s fair to punish someone for being proactive". While she says you're taking all the spotlight.

The game isn't about being proactive, the game is about having fun.
If you're having fun being proactive - that's good.
But if your behavior, dispite it being fun for you - reduces the fun of your fellow players - that's bad.

Look, honestly, I get it - you don't try to be that guy; nothing in your post indicates that you are - but that's what you silently are doing. While you're having fun, you're accidently ruining other peoples fun.

It's important you realise this, and take that into account.



And for the love of Bahamut, don't take umbrace in them telling you this, when you asked. BE GLAD they did. If they didn't, you'd be a few sessions away from not getting invited anymore.

[Jerrykhor]

If your party has the luxury to get drunk at bars so often, its not really your fault, its the DM. Where's the plot hook? Or is the party just not biting it?

[Vhagar]

I’m quoting this particular post because it asked a question which I want to answer, but I also want to thank everyone who has posted as well and offered there advice. I’ve been mulling it over and will be talking to the dm privately next week about my concerns as well as the group. In truth before my friend brought up to me that I might be domineering I just thought I was “doing a good job”, but as someone else commented, it’s not about winning or being the best. It’s about having fun. I think someone suggested that I ask the group what they think we should do first and give my opinion last, which I think could balance things out.


If your party has the luxury to get drunk at bars so often, its not really your fault, its the DM. Where's the plot hook? Or is the party just not biting it?

Now to answer your question, although there is plenty of bar hopping, it’s more that certain players don’t seem to be interested in interacting with the involvement or the goings on of the area we are in. It’s just a spot to get supplies and then on to the next place to stock up again....and then on again! :p

We are currently in a city called bayfrost, where we have been investigating the shadowclaw guild (they have been abducting children of exotic races). It was my determination that we would be in the city for a while since it took us 4 days to get there, but apparently they just wanted to get supplies and leave right away. One of our members was kidnapped though so it caused us to hang around for longer.

To me, it seemed like a no brained. The DM has set up a side quest to investigate the shadowclaw with the premise that they kidnapped a member of our party which made it personal (we got her back btw).

What set this whole chain of events into motion was a friend of mine complaining to me that I was keeping them in bayfrost for longer than they wanted. Here is the quote.

“I mean when we get into town sometimes it's perfectly fine to just stock up on items and find a hotel room. We don't always need to get to the bottom of problems the town may be having”. 🤷*♂️-

While I can understand that, I thought everyone was on board with investigating this further since the dm garner really established a clear “main plot line” let and it wasn’t like there was a time limit in getting to the next town.

Also for anyone that is reading this it sounds like I’m being very critical of my friends but that’s not my intent. Although I am venting my frustration I genuinely want everyone to have fun and find commonality in what role playing provides to our social lives.

[Randomthom]

On that same token though. I often find that if I don’t initiate plot points or don’t suggest places to go or things to do everyone just ends up just going on shopping trips and role-playing getting drunk at bars. 🤦*♂️

This is somewhat similar to one of my games. I often feel like I'm the guy pushing the story forward while others are, to my eyes, "screwing around". It took me a while to realise that I wanted to see what happened next in the story while, to them, the "screwing around" (talking to RandomNPC#23, getting drunk in the bar) was the most fun part of the game.

It was about different expectations.

We were recently chatting about this in a discord group, I'll post something I wrote there here;

My personal rule as a player, unless they're a character with some sort of quest or story element I PROBABLY won't engage in more than a few lines of dialogue with them. Part of this is me thinking with my DM hat on, I know I wouldn't have more than some scant background info on this character (if that, they might have just been made up on the spot) were I the DM so me trying to milk some RP encounter out of this NPC is putting a lot of work on the DM for not much reason. I'm sure they've got some great NPCs around the corner they're just dying for me to meet
I don't enforce this rule on anyone else when I'm playing and if I'm DM'ing and you spark up a conversation with randomNPC#23 in nowheresville I'll do my very best to make them a 3-dimensional character
But when I'm playing and another player spends ½ the session talking with nothing-NPCs I do tend to get a little bit frustrated, both as myself and on-behalf of the DM who is being made to think 10x harder to maintain verisimilitude in their world
I've had encounters before where I managed to think of something on-the-fly and run with it and surprised the players later when I mentioned that wasn't a planned NPC and I've been the player on the other side of that coin, it can happen and work well but when I see the DM struggling to come up with a name, occupation, description, accent or purpose for continuing the conversation I often try to bail them out

Caveat: All the below is full of assumptions that aren't meant to be personal attacks, if they don't apply to you & your situation, please just ignore them. I'm (mis)reading between the lines here somewhat and likely getting it wrong.

Short-version, I'd advise to try to be aware of when people are having fun and don't interrupt that. You may feel like the chat with the shopkeeper has run it's course but if the players involved AND THE DM look like they're having fun then don't interrupt it. Wait for that to move along rather than trying actively to stop it (not sure if you are but in a similar situation, that's my natural desire. If the DM is struggling to make this character work then try to give them a get-out, again in-character.

Don't be afraid to keep taking the initiative but I'd echo other advice here which would be to bring others onboard more. "First we need to get in quietly, ROGUE, that's your specialty, any ideas?"
"FIGHTER, how should we handle the guards?" or if you're unsure, just "WARLOCK, any ideas on how we do this?"
Do these things, even if you've got better ideas for how to do it then use their ideas. Out of game you might be the master tactician who knows D&D inside & out. In-game, your character doesn't and should seek the advice of those more learned in the various tactics you're seeking to employ. DMs giving a character the spotlight is good, it's their job. Other players doing it feels really cool and makes the world feel more connected.

Perhaps the other players are (unconsciously) playing the RP side of the game more because you've taken over the tactical side?

Lastly, have a watch of Matt Colville's excellent video entitled "different kinds of players". It sounds to me like you might be something akin to the "tactician".

[Vhagar]

This is somewhat similar to one of my games. I often feel like I'm the guy pushing the story forward while others are, to my eyes, "screwing around". It took me a while to realise that I wanted to see what happened next in the story while, to them, the "screwing around" (talking to RandomNPC#23, getting drunk in the bar) was the most fun part of the game.

It was about different expectations.

We were recently chatting about this in a discord group, I'll post something I wrote there here;


Caveat: All the below is full of assumptions that aren't meant to be personal attacks, if they don't apply to you & your situation, please just ignore them. I'm (mis)reading between the lines here somewhat and likely getting it wrong.

Short-version, I'd advise to try to be aware of when people are having fun and don't interrupt that. You may feel like the chat with the shopkeeper has run it's course but if the players involved AND THE DM look like they're having fun then don't interrupt it. Wait for that to move along rather than trying actively to stop it (not sure if you are but in a similar situation, that's my natural desire. If the DM is struggling to make this character work then try to give them a get-out, again in-character.

Don't be afraid to keep taking the initiative but I'd echo other advice here which would be to bring others onboard more. "First we need to get in quietly, ROGUE, that's your specialty, any ideas?"
"FIGHTER, how should we handle the guards?" or if you're unsure, just "WARLOCK, any ideas on how we do this?"
Do these things, even if you've got better ideas for how to do it then use their ideas. Out of game you might be the master tactician who knows D&D inside & out. In-game, your character doesn't and should seek the advice of those more learned in the various tactics you're seeking to employ. DMs giving a character the spotlight is good, it's their job. Other players doing it feels really cool and makes the world feel more connected.

Perhaps the other players are (unconsciously) playing the RP side of the game more because you've taken over the tactical side?

Lastly, have a watch of Matt Colville's excellent video entitled "different kinds of players". It sounds to me like you might be something akin to the "tactician".

I watched the video and it was very illuminating, though I will say I think I’m equal parts tactician and actor.

[MoiMagnus]

As said by other, Mystic is probably not the problem here (though it might make the problem worse, as it gives you a lot of tools).
The problem is a human problem. And knowing what kind of player are the others, and what they actually enjoy, will help you a lot here.

If I try to decode:

“on a quest to become the “Main character”’.
I read:
- You value advancing the plot, in other word "winning the game", more than having fun with your character chilling around and actually playing your character. When your group tries to "advance the plot", this is the part of the game where they have the LESS agency. Because (1) to make choices, you need ideas and (2) there is often choices that are better than other, hence no real choices, especially if there is someone clever enough in the group to prevent any stupid plan or mistake to be made. In other word, the moment where you have the most freedom to play your character is when you are doing all the "useless stuff" like shopping and talking with random NPCs. And freedom (aka player agency) is something a lot of people seek in RPG.
- Since you are the player who care the most about the "main plot", and by far, anything related to the main plot is essentially "the story created by the DM for your character", with the other character having only the remaining of the session to have the spotlight.

Lastly, there is a point which is quite difficult to handle: even without being mechanically OP, you can be too efficient as a player for the enjoyment of the others.
Imagine you're playing a campaign, which has a major twist at the end (like "you were tricked and your quest to 'defeat the bad guy' instead grant him immortality"), and everyone is falling for it, except you: you understood the trick by yourself, and came with a plan to actually avoid the twist. While this campaign will feel amazing for you, the campaign would possibly have been more interesting for the others if you didn't see it coming, you were all defeated by the bad guy, and then had to go on the path of vengeance to reclaim victory. In other words, just because the other players don't find a solution to the problem, or don't find a way to win, doesn't mean they will actually enjoy being given a way to solve the problem or win, and it can even diminish their enjoyment of the story. And if that's always the same person that see through the twist of the DM, it can quickly become frustrating for the others.

But on the other hand, if you actually see through the DM's plan, faking you don't know what is about to happen will be probably more frustrating for you than anything...

[Composer99]

It sounds as if you have a rather different play style than some (most? all?) of your fellow players. I won't say fundamentally incompatible, but it does seem as if there's some work involved to keep everyone having fun. I daresay everyone else who has replied has given lots of good advice on that score.

If your free time permits, I wonder if it might be worth finding a game - perhaps one being played online - where the overall tenor more closely suits your tastes. That may afford you the opportunity to scratch your tactical/problem-solving itch while still getting the valuable social time with your friends in the game under discussion. (Although here again the advice on soliciting input from others remains valid.)

[KorvinStarmast]

While unintentional, I have become sort of the unofficial “leader” of the group. Make no mistake. I am not the actual leader; Just the “idea man” so to speak. The last four major strategies I concocted (spanning from infiltrating enemy bases, going undercover in a brothel to possibly initiating a prison riot (coming soon ^_^)

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.

I apologized about it but silently took umbrage at the assertion. I don’t think it’s fair to punish someone for being proactive, coming up with unique and interesting strategies and pursuing plot points and side quests. First, MaxWilson's advice is good stuff. As a frequently mission-focused player ...

I joined a group of people a few years ago whom I had never met. I am self aware enough to know that with a type A personality (I have one, Yes) it is easy for me to fall into the role of taking charge. What I did not want to do with a group of new players was chaffe. I deployed a couple of little techniques that I still use in that group, and in two other groups, where I tend to be very mission focused and some of the others not as much.

When it's my turn, or when there is that deadly pause where nobody is making any in put, I'll often do this:
"Based on {this}, I suggest we do {that}." and then I turn to one of the others and ask something along the lines of "What do you think?" or "or is this a bad idea that gets us all killed?"
What I am fishing for is input, any input, from the group on what course of action they are pondering. In the back of my brain I am often hearing that little voice "We need to get off of top dead center" but that voice gets kept in its box. More often than not, if someone suggests doing something differently I simply nod and go along with it. Whatever plan or course of action we are taking, I just want to know what it is so I can help make it work.

Why? I want the team to work together, not wander along with me driving the bus. I have identified two of the other players as, if not leaders, at least other 'idea' persons, and I'll ask them "What's the plan?" or "What's your plan here" before I offer anything. It is often followed by "what do you need me to do?"

A good, or even an average, plan executed now is often quite better than a "perfect" plan tried later because it keeps play moving.


If you keep haivng style and intensity differences with your group, it's not that unusual. You can still play the game with them but you need to let go of "the best plan" approach, and accept "a good enough" plan from another one of the players. Coax it out of them, and then try to execute their plan to your best ability.

It works for me, but it may be that this fits out group well and may not fit your group at all.

[MaxWilson]

We are currently in a city called bayfrost, where we have been investigating the shadowclaw guild (they have been abducting children of exotic races). It was my determination that we would be in the city for a while since it took us 4 days to get there, but apparently they just wanted to get supplies and leave right away. One of our members was kidnapped though so it caused us to hang around for longer.

To me, it seemed like a no brained. The DM has set up a side quest to investigate the shadowclaw with the premise that they kidnapped a member of our party which made it personal (we got her back btw).

What set this whole chain of events into motion was a friend of mine complaining to me that I was keeping them in bayfrost for longer than they wanted. Here is the quote.

“I mean when we get into town sometimes it's perfectly fine to just stock up on items and find a hotel room. We don't always need to get to the bottom of problems the town may be having”. 🤷*♂️-

While I can understand that, I thought everyone was on board with investigating this further since the dm garner really established a clear “main plot line” let and it wasn’t like there was a time limit in getting to the next town.

So you assumed everyone wanted to bite this plot hook, and the group wound up hanging around and getting involved, but it turned out they actually wanted to do something else, yes? What happened in between to make this happen? Did the PC get kidnapped immediately, while they were getting supplies, or was that the result of some of the things you did as a result of your "determination that we would be in the city for a while?" After the PC was rescued, who decided that it was now "personal" with the guild, and what actions did the party take at that point instead of leaving town?

There are some things I don't yet understand, but my conjecture is that if everyone really just wanted to get out of town and go dungeon crawling or something, but they wound up doing something else, it may be because you started declaring actions to the DM, and the DM responded, and you declared more actions, and the party found themselves in this situation they never wanted to be in in the first place, all because they were patiently waiting for you to finish up your thing in the town they only meant to get supplies in.

Effectively, they got railroaded, by a player instead of the DM.

Which brings us back to the seeking unanimity thing and listening. Next time you'll know not to assume you know what everyone wants. Right now it doesn't sound like the problem is about you being more "proactive" and them being passive lumps--it sounds like they just wanted to move on but wound up getting involved against their will. The solution is not to wallflower, it's to seek consensus before acting. Maybe they'll be perfectly fine with proactive actions in service of a goal that everybody shares, instead of a goal with you mistakenly assume they share. Ask questions and listen.

Of course I could be totally wrong, this is just conjecture based on secondhand information. :) Does any of this sound plausible to you though?

[Vhagar]

So you assumed everyone wanted to bite this plot hook, and the group wound up hanging around and getting involved, but it turned out they actually wanted to do something else, yes? What happened in between to make this happen? Did the PC get kidnapped immediately, while they were getting supplies, or was that the result of some of the things you did as a result of your "determination that we would be in the city for a while?" After the PC was rescued, who decided that it was now "personal" with the guild, and what actions did the party take at that point instead of leaving town?

There are some things I don't yet understand, but my conjecture is that if everyone really just wanted to get out of town and go dungeon crawling or something, but they wound up doing something else, it may be because you started declaring actions to the DM, and the DM responded, and you declared more actions, and the party found themselves in this situation they never wanted to be in in the first place, all because they were patiently waiting for you to finish up your thing in the town they only meant to get supplies in.

Effectively, they got railroaded, by a player instead of the DM.

Which brings us back to the seeking unanimity thing and listening. Next time you'll know not to assume you know what everyone wants. Right now it doesn't sound like the problem is about you being more "proactive" and them being passive lumps--it sounds like they just wanted to move on but wound up getting involved against their will. The solution is not to wallflower, it's to seek consensus before acting. Maybe they'll be perfectly fine with proactive actions in service of a goal that everybody shares, instead of a goal with you mistakenly assume they share. Ask questions and listen.

Of course I could be totally wrong, this is just conjecture based on secondhand information. :) Does any of this sound plausible to you though?


The Pc got kidnapped because she was sleeping on the roof of a building at night as apposed to an inn. Also in my defense when we decided to investigate this further I did ask the whole party if they were in agreement and we unanimously decided to go forward with the plan. I think maybe certain players were just unhappy with the outcome and assumed that the Dm would have wrapped up this plot point as apposed to expanding in it further?

I think the problem is actually two fold; pacing and expectation as to what the campaign will be like.

As someone who is more active in the game (we have some audience members as Matthew Colville put it) I’ll Take a cue from them and step back at points to allow the game to happen around me and shine when prompted to buy the DM. I think maybe that is a good middle ground to find.

[MaxWilson]

The Pc got kidnapped because she was sleeping on the roof of a building at night as apposed to an inn. Also in my defense when we decided to investigate this further I did ask the whole party if they were in agreement and we unanimously decided to go forward with the plan. I think maybe certain players were just unhappy with the outcome and assumed that the Dm would have wrapped up this plot point as apposed to expanding in it further?

Ah, okay. My conjecture was probably wrong then. Hypothesis disproven. : )


I think the problem is actually two fold; pacing and expectation as to what the campaign will be like.

As someone who is more active in the game (we have some audience members as Matthew Colville put it) I’ll Take a cue from them and step back at points to allow the game to happen around me and shine when prompted to buy the DM. I think maybe that is a good middle ground to find.

Good luck!

[Conradine]

It could be worse.
You could be a Paladin.

[Damon_Tor]

I feel like we have a "I'm playing a mystic and my group hates how I dominate the game" every month or so.

[ChildofLuthic]

DnD is hard because everyone wants the spotlight, and there often isn't enough spotlight to go around. This is especially hard as a proactive player (such as myself, or you) because you have ideas, and other people don't, so the spotlight naturally goes to you unless you actively work to prevent that from happening. This makes people resentful, regardless of how "fair" that is, because it makes the game about you.

The way I avoid this is by actively thinking of ways to incorporate other character's abilities in my plans. This requires you know other people's characters very well, both in a mechanical sense and in a narrative sense. I would also suggest letting the other characters roleplay and make bad decisions, if that's how they have fun. Oftentimes, the way people have fun is by being silly, especially in DnD.

[Catullus64]

The replies to the thread which focus on this issue as a problem of group dynamics rather than class balance are generally correct. Since they cover that ground pretty well, I'll use my space to venture that, to a much smaller degree, Mystic itself does also contribute to this problem.

Generally, it's something of a rule (how well the extant classes follow this rule is another debate) that versatility comes at the expense of power; with the number of disciplines most mystics gain access to, and the Psi Points mechanic being more flexible than spell slots, mystics stretch that principle quite a lot. I generally think that wanting to build a heavily utility-focused, problem-solver character is fine and admirable, because most of the class mechanics will necessitate that you sacrifice a certain degree of raw power to accomplish that. Mystic makes no such demands.

Add to that the fact that many of the mystic powers are just good old-fashioned overpowered. Wizards of the Coast hasn't released it in official form after several years, which strikes me as a tacit acknowledgement that it clashed with the core design of the game, and needs serious reworking. When you use unprinted sources, even official ones, that offer that level of versatility and power together, it's easy for people to read powergaming and main-character ascension into your motives, even if, as in the case of the original post, no such intention exists.

Especially if you use Nomadic Mind. Screw Nomadic Mind.

[Keravath]

“I have the highest intelligence in the group and with my mystic perks I have a ton of advantage while gathering information.

Just the “idea man” so to speak. The last four major strategies I concocted (spanning from infiltrating enemy bases, going undercover in a brothel to possibly initiating a prison riot (coming soon ^_^)

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.”

There are two issues

1) ideas, planning and dominating the group decision making process
2) An OP and broken character class that can outshine everyone else at the table

The “domineering” comment likely refers to coming up with plans and presenting them in such a way that they are the best choice so folks feel like it is a waste of time to try to come up with their own suggestions or support an alternate course of action when it isn’t as good a choice. Basically, by being good at coming up with ideas you preempt other players from coming up with anything on their own or contributing to the process.

2) however, you don’t get a “main character” comment for coming up with ideas. You get it for coming up with ideas featuring your character in a central role and because your character class is so versatile and OP your character becomes the obvious lynch pin in all of your great ideas .. except maybe combat and I would be willing to bet that your character is still very good at this aspect of the game too if not the best.

So it sounds like you come up with good ideas to solve in game challenges where your character often plays a central role because they have the skills and abilities to make the plans work. Other players have trouble coming up with better ideas since they have less OP and less versatile characters among other reasons (they just aren’t as suited to the central role of organizing a prison revolt for example). All of which, leaves the other players feeling marginalized like sidekicks in a super hero movie.

To fix it, try to involve the other players in a meaningful way in the group decision making process and, if you don’t change your class, then try very hard to not maximize their mechanical advantages, versatility and generally OP nature.

[djreynolds]

Are you playing the Order of the Awakened?

That class is not quite balanced yet, that said, we ran through CoS and the Immortal was great, definitely the hard hitter we needed and my cleric had no issue buffing him.

Thought Spear is no strong than Eldritch Blast, I find the skills portion very cool

What are the other classes at the table?

[Ganryu]

Yeah, part of the problem is probably the fact your class exacerbates the 'domineering' aspect.

Mystics are able to do everything. That is a problem.They aren't kings of it, but they can step on peoples toes, and make them feel less special. If the rogue fails a check, and the mystic comes up and does it anyways, even if the rogue normally passes it, he feels bad.

In combat, the fighter is the guy everyone goes to to get behind, suddenly the mystic is doomfisting people away. (Seriously, one of the disciples is basically "I'm Doomfist"). The fighter's getting stepped on, even though he's probably doing more DPR than the mystic.

Mystic does make this problem so much worse.

------------
I also have the domineering personality problem, and I have to watch myself, because if I don't, I will run over every problem. Try to figure out what everyone else is good at (or thinks they are good at), and if they are in the middle of doing it, for the love of the heavens, DON'T HELP!

I have arcana for my cleric. When the wizard is doing something arcana related, I will not ask to do the check, and leave it far the hell away, because that's his niche. I can do enough outside it that doesn't bother me.

We need something stolen? We have a sneaky sorcerer I will call over to do stuff, even though I'm not bad at it.

Players love it when you give them a niche, and don't step on it. IF they fail, oh well.e

[HiveStriker]

Hi there. So pretty silly title but I am having an issue with my current campaign and would love some feedback.

Right now I am playing a mystic who I have designed to have quite a bit of utility in role play.

I have the highest intelligence in the group and with my mystic perks I have a ton of advantage while gathering information.

While unintentional, I have become sort of the unofficial “leader” of the group. Make no mistake. I am not the actual leader; Just the “idea man” so to speak. The last four major strategies I concocted (spanning from infiltrating enemy bases, going undercover in a brothel to possibly initiating a prison riot (coming soon ^_^)

I started feeling some hostility from my friends. So I asked one of them privately if everything was ok. She essentially said that I was domineering. I’m her words I was “on a quest to become the “Main character”’.

I apologized about it but silently took umbrage at the assertion. I don’t think it’s fair to punish someone for being proactive, coming up with unique and interesting strategies and pursuing plot points and side quests.

I don’t want to alienate my friends of course, but also I want to have fun. Trying to strike a balance between utilizing my characters abilities as well as my own personal imagination and problem-solving skills while not seeming like an overzealous *******.

On that same token though. I often find that if I don’t initiate plot points or don’t suggest places to go or things to do everyone just ends up just going on shopping trips and role-playing getting drunk at bars. 🤦*♂️


most of what I’m saying in this thread is just me being frustrated and complaining, but I am actually looking for some solid advice. Should I just swallow the bitter pill and become more of a wallflower so my friends can take the proverbial reigns or is there a way to be more inclusive without having to become a shrinking violet?

Well, there may be several reasons. :)
A few advices aiming wildly:

1. Party's annoyance lies in the decision process itself (aka "you tell us what to do with our chars!")
--> Force yourself to be reactive instead of proactive unless the situation is dire and you feel your idea is both the *right* one and urgent to take.
--> Try and brew brainstorming by focusing your mind on formulating a problem in a general/open-ended way (so facilitating party's wild ideas emergence) instead of building your own solution for your vision of it.

2. Party's annoyance lies in the fact you can do everything they can and actually takes their place too often to their taste.
--> Try to view yourself as a support. Of course it depends much on your Discipline choices (more on that later), but for example, you could assist a Bard pal trying to Persuade by asking him first what the core blocker is and trying to manipulate the mind of the "enemy" to remove/alleviate that blocker (ex commercial contract, required price is much too high). Or create a distraction for Rogue trying to sneak by using telekinesis on an object to make high noise, or putting chaos by creating illusion in another's mind.

3. You trivialize too many things because you just know damn too well how to use all Mystic's overpowerness of grabbing and evaluating intel.

--> Stop at the "gather intel" step, let your party decide by themselves which intel they really want, from who, and how to exploit it once obtained (hardest).
--> Use your intellect to integrate *also* everyone else's abilities and prefered tactics, and use it to adjust decision-taking as minimally as you seem needed to simply avoid going for a dead-end plan (which implies, accept and support plans that seem less than perfect, as long as they seem at least realistic).
--> Put some water into your wine and swap a Discipline for one combat-focused, preferably one that would not make you overshine a compadre in its specialty (replacing one problem with another) so you spend more resources on "regular PC fighting awesomeness" instead of depriving them of their chance to shine by debunking/anticipating any threat or challenge.
Ex: Avoid Nomadic Mind if you have a Cleric (they have Locate rituals), avoid Precognition if you have a Skillmonkey, avoid investing in single strike damage ifyou have a Rogue, etc...
Good all-around disciplines that will certainly avoid overlight while still being useful (and potentially great for party):
- Nomadic Step: you could fill-in as an off-Monk, luring enemies away to split their forces then instantly backtrack as needed with teleport.
- Giant Growth would make you a great "off-Barbarian support", grappling and shoving even larger creatures for your friends to gang upon.
- Adaptive Body is a very bland discipline, kinda situational, but still effective when it can be used.
- Mantle disciplines, especially the Command one, will make you love and be loved by party.

Avoid Psychic Inquisition and Telepathic Contact at all costs unless it was really the core idea of your character (in which case fall back on other ideas). Seeing as "deciding for everyone because i'm so good at getting info" seems your core problem, better cut its larger roots directly.

[Corran]

Now to answer your question, although there is plenty of bar hopping, it’s more that certain players don’t seem to be interested in interacting with the involvement or the goings on of the area we are in. It’s just a spot to get supplies and then on to the next place to stock up again....and then on again! :p

We are currently in a city called bayfrost, where we have been investigating the shadowclaw guild (they have been abducting children of exotic races). It was my determination that we would be in the city for a while since it took us 4 days to get there, but apparently they just wanted to get supplies and leave right away. One of our members was kidnapped though so it caused us to hang around for longer.

To me, it seemed like a no brained. The DM has set up a side quest to investigate the shadowclaw with the premise that they kidnapped a member of our party which made it personal (we got her back btw).

What set this whole chain of events into motion was a friend of mine complaining to me that I was keeping them in bayfrost for longer than they wanted. Here is the quote.

“I mean when we get into town sometimes it's perfectly fine to just stock up on items and find a hotel room. We don't always need to get to the bottom of problems the town may be having”. 🤷*♂️-

While I can understand that, I thought everyone was on board with investigating this further since the dm garner really established a clear “main plot line” let and it wasn’t like there was a time limit in getting to the next town.

Also for anyone that is reading this it sounds like I’m being very critical of my friends but that’s not my intent. Although I am venting my frustration I genuinely want everyone to have fun and find commonality in what role playing provides to our social lives.
Your problem is that the other pc's lack the motivation to do the things you want your character to do. Maybe it's because you don't give them enough time and space to realize their characters' motives and act on them. What your friend told you makes me think it's mostly that. But it might also be partly because the plot hook is set in a way that does not seem appealing to the other players (as far as their characters are concerned). Meaning, if the DM sets up something and most of the players want to just skip it, this might not only be because of you. The DM can help you here, and partly it's their problem to solve too. Presenting the players with some motivation for their characters isn't too hard (assuming functional characters and a functional group). So, having a conversation with the DM about this could help. Or even better, you could do this during play. For example, if the greedy rogue is hesitating about investigating this, say that there is probably someone will to pay good coins to have this problem solved. Then leave it up to the DM and that player. Heck, you can even have your character pay said greedy rogue to join in this adventure. If it's a pc issue for you, you could always have your pc stay behind and join the group with a new pc (if that's not a problem to others for whatever reason). And if the DM allows, later on your old pc could rejoin and serve as an exposition vessel too, if there was any significance to that quest that the rest of the party skipped. But if you, as a player, want to explore hooks that others aren't interested in, then try to create some motivation for the other pc's, or in this case, you might want to give them some time to form their own motivations, maybe while trying to give some small and discrete boosts towards that direction yourself.

[Ravinsild]

It's tough because I can't actually see you, and because this is a people problem not a gaming problem, but if you're serious about wanting to learn better ways to interact you will have to do a lot of listening first.

One concrete tip I can give you for being more inclusive is to seek unanimity: when you're trying to get 100% of people on board with a plan before taking action, instead of just a majority, studies have shown that marginalized people are more likely to have their voices heard. If you mentally keep track of who hasn't spoken up yet and ask, "Barb, we haven't heard from you yet. How do you feel about leaving this tavern and going to look for trouble in the mine shaft?" you may learn more about what your friends really want out of the game.

Good luck.

Good guy MaxWilson. That’s rock solid advice. I’m going to start doing this. I think it’s a pretty conscientious and considerate thing to do. Thanks!

[Tanarii]

I for one am a little surprised these shadowclaws still exist after kidnapping a party member, even if you got her back. That's one step below stealing their stuff when it comes to things that motivate player to salt the earth of the entire clan of their enemies, to the third generation. I mean, you can TPK an entire party and they'll take it better than a kidnapping.

(Note I'm assuming it was an off screen kidnapping here. Kidnapping a character in combat is usually viewed as 'fair play')

[Sigreid]

In general I find it better to get a feel for what the other party members see their character doing and build a character that does other things.

Beyond that, simple questions like how long does everyone want to stay in town can be huge.

[xen]

Some players just want to fake hard drinking and hit stuff. The longer you keep them from finding the next stuff to hit, you're wasting their time. Just a thought.