Cliche Bard

[BoredAsUsual]

Hail and well met!

I feel like I only go on this board to whine about a fellow player doing something with their character that no one else at the table likes (but that they back up with class rules and loose arguments).

The problem: The horny bard made another player feel uncomfortable by insinuating a sexual relationship between their characters (and just taking up the whole session being weirdly sexual with goblins). After the session the uncomfortable player pulled the horny bard aside and explained that they felt uncomfortable. Horny bard then proceeded to use their class forcing them into a role as an excuse to not change their behavior and is also upset that they are being targeted for playing their character a certain way.

So I guess why I'm really here is to ask if being in the glamour college really makes players forced to act like a sexual deviant? The player is a bard and they say that the bard forces a person to roleplay out a horny character. And that the class description for the glamour college also encourages using sex to get what you want.

Now I've read the class description for both 5e bard and the glamour college. Am I missing something? I think at one point it said something about "seductive, fey magic" and "fey magic that makes others want to serve you". I can see how someone would actively decide to make their character sexual because of that, but I didn't feel like the class was forcing them into that role.

In fact I thought up a great character idea using the glamour college in which my character would be a small child using her adorable childish innocence to get what she wants from people. "Please don't hurt me, mister dragon." (cue Puss in Boots face). Nothing sexual about that and I could probably come up with a ton more non-sexual bard ideas.

[KorvinStarmast]

Hail and well met!

I feel like I only go on this board to whine about a fellow player doing something with their character that no one else at the table likes (but that they back up with class rules and loose arguments).

The problem: The horny bard made another player feel uncomfortable by insinuating a sexual relationship between their characters (and just taking up the whole session being weirdly sexual with goblins). After the session the uncomfortable player pulled the horny bard aside and explained that they felt uncomfortable. Horny bard then proceeded to use their class forcing them into a role as an excuse to not change their behavior and is also upset that they are being targeted for playing their character a certain way. OK, we have My Guy Syndrome (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/37103/22566) here. (and a person with interpersonal skills issues as well)

So I guess why I'm really here is to ask if being in the glamour college really makes players forced to act like a sexual deviant?
Nope, the players is being a jerk.

The player is a bard and they say that the bard forces a person to roleplay out a horny character. And that the class description for the glamour college also encourages using sex to get what you want. Nothing in a PC class description voids the need for the Players to get along and have a healthy relationship with each other at the table.
Players are more important that Characters.
And I'll suggest that you say (something like) this directly to the Bard Player:
"The players getting along is the most important thing in this game.
We are real, the Characters are not real.
Tone it down, you are harshing the other player's groove with this overly sexualized approach."

Now I've read the class description for both 5e bard and the glamour college. Am I missing something? Nope.

Rich Burlew has a lovely article about this called "Making the Tough Decisions" But I just discovered that I can't find the link anymore. :(

[FaerieGodfather]

Seems straightforward to me. You've got a player making other people uncomfortable, refusing to stop, and using "but the book says!" as an excuse for refusing to stop.

It literally does not matter, in the slightest, whether or not the book says that the player should play the Glamour Bard that way. They can feel free to take the book with them when they leave.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

The Bard player isn't smart enough to get the point across in a way which allows everyone to enjoy the game.

Or he could just like making people uncomfortable which may be worse than not being smart enough.

[Chad.e.clark]

Sounds like the bard player is not reading the cue's from the rest of the group that he/she is playing in a way that is not well accepted from the rest of the group (I would not play with someone like that either, fwiw.)

I assume the group is full of mature adults, who would knock off untoward behavior once it is brought to their attention. Any character can be played to an unacceptable extreme. If a player doesnt want to accept that they are making other players uncomfortable with their bs-behavior , dont play with them. Boot them from the group, or find a different group.

[Grey Watcher]

Even if the class description said "You are legally bound to play this character as a creepy perv" (which most definitely it does not), they still chose to play this character in the first place. So we still come back to their decisions here, decisions which put some sense of obligation to an inanimate book (whose authors are on the record as being fine with changing their stuff to suit your own game) ahead of getting along with the real people sharing the table.

Basically, it sounds like they wanted to play a pervy character and are just using "but the book says so" as an cheap excuse to avoid the consequences of that choice.

The initial mistake is one thing: miscommunications and misreading of signals do happen and sometimes what person A thinks is a silly joke ends up being really off-putting to person B. Sucks when it happens, but it does happen. Where this person crosses the line for me is trying to absolve themselves of responsibility for that mistake by citing the (non-existent) passage in the book. To paraphrase Homer Simpson, "I have to! The cookie told me to!" It's just as ridiculous a rationale.

They might as well have said "But I have to play to the stereotype, or JoCat said Matt Mercer would break into my house and throw foam noodles at me! (https://youtu.be/qiHXxrCB5yk?t=99)" It'd make just as much sense, and at least be a more interesting reference.

EDIT:
Rich Burlew has a lovely article about this called "Making the Tough Decisions" But I just discovered that I can't find the link anymore. :(

Web Archive has you covered. (http://web.archive.org/web/20040625155415/http://www.giantitp.com/frm0007.html) (Scroll down to the "Decide to React Differently" header for the relevant bit.)

[Willie the Duck]

The problem: The horny bard made another player feel uncomfortable by insinuating a sexual relationship between their characters (and just taking up the whole session being weirdly sexual with goblins). After the session the uncomfortable player pulled the horny bard aside and explained that they felt uncomfortable. Horny bard then proceeded to use their class forcing them into a role as an excuse to not change their behavior and is also upset that they are being targeted for playing their character a certain way.

Beginning of next session:
You: "Before we begin, let us get this out of the way. <points at horny bard character> Let's make this easy. There is no excuse along the lines of, 'but I am just playing my character' that makes making other players uncomfortable with your behavior somehow acceptable. Do not ever use that excuse in front of me again if you expect to receive any respect from me. Now, if someone says that they do not want you to treat their character in a sexual manner, you will honor that request, as it isn't actually a request. Let us be clear, you. do. not. get. a. vote. in. this. matter. If you have a problem with this scenario, this can be our final night gaming together and we can wrap up early (as in now). I do not care if you feel targeted or anything else on this issue. There is absolutely nothing in the description of the bard that suggests that they have to be horndog seductionmeisters, and for that matter, no one has a problem if you want to be the perpetual flirt who always hits on the NPC barmaids. You chose to <however you want to frame what they did with said other character>, and when told that it was unwelcome, did literally anything other than said, 'okay, I will not do so again.' You have crossed a line that any-functional-adult would understand is not acceptable. It. Will. Not. Happen. Again. Clear?"

And then... actually expect bluster and not react. I am working under the assumption that this is an otherwise decent person who simply doesn't realize that in-character actions have real-world consequence for others. If that is not the case, and they are a massive jerk as well, I'm not sure any of this is necessary, simply stop playing with them. Anyways, even semi-decent horny bard player will bellow and moan and be defensive, because, well, human nature. Simply be firm with "this is not negotiable" and "this or that defense (such as 'just playing your character') is not an excuse for crossing other peoples' boundaries of sexual acceptability. You are fortunate to be learning this lesson here, and not in the workforce, or similar situation. If someone says such and such a sexual behavior makes them uncomfortable and asks you to stop, you do not get to continue it towards them. Cold stop. End of Discussion." And, in the end, if they refuse to respect others' boundaries, scoop and leave. There's no good reason for subjecting yourself to that.

[Zetakya]

That player would be disinvited from my table and I would never play with them ever again.

Sexual harassment is one my zero-tolerance list alongside racism, homophobia, transphobia and a few other things.

[Warlush]

Yeah i say kill his character off and give em' the boot. There's no room for that at a table.

[Wizard_Lizard]

Explain that bards.. don't have to be horny all the time?? Like.. that presumption only really exists within dnd self referencing itself and memes. Explain that Homer was a bard and Shakespeare was a bard.. and they were known for.. other things.

[P. G. Macer]

Bards being horny is a stereotype found in D&D memes that has little descriptive and absolutely no prescriptive basis in reality.

As several in this thread have eloquently pointed out, “It’s what my character would do!” is never a valid excuse. The player needs to cut it out if it’s making even one other person at the table uncomfortable.

[1Pirate]

Damn...I kinda thought this was going to be a thread on a homebrew Bard College when I clicked on it.


Beginning of next session:
You: "Before we begin, let us get this out of the way. <points at horny bard character> Let's make this easy. There is no excuse along the lines of, 'but I am just playing my character' that makes making other players uncomfortable with your behavior somehow acceptable. Do not ever use that excuse in front of me again if you expect to receive any respect from me. Now, if someone says that they do not want you to treat their character in a sexual manner, you will honor that request, as it isn't actually a request. Let us be clear, you. do. not. get. a. vote. in. this. matter. If you have a problem with this scenario, this can be our final night gaming together and we can wrap up early (as in now). I do not care if you feel targeted or anything else on this issue. There is absolutely nothing in the description of the bard that suggests that they have to be horndog seductionmeisters, and for that matter, no one has a problem if you want to be the perpetual flirt who always hits on the NPC barmaids. You chose to <however you want to frame what they did with said other character>, and when told that it was unwelcome, did literally anything other than said, 'okay, I will not do so again.' You have crossed a line that any-functional-adult would understand is not acceptable. It. Will. Not. Happen. Again. Clear?"

And then... actually expect bluster and not react. I am working under the assumption that this is an otherwise decent person who simply doesn't realize that in-character actions have real-world consequence for others. If that is not the case, and they are a massive jerk as well, I'm not sure any of this is necessary, simply stop playing with them. Anyways, even semi-decent horny bard player will bellow and moan and be defensive, because, well, human nature. Simply be firm with "this is not negotiable" and "this or that defense (such as 'just playing your character') is not an excuse for crossing other peoples' boundaries of sexual acceptability. You are fortunate to be learning this lesson here, and not in the workforce, or similar situation. If someone says such and such a sexual behavior makes them uncomfortable and asks you to stop, you do not get to continue it towards them. Cold stop. End of Discussion." And, in the end, if they refuse to respect others' boundaries, scoop and leave. There's no good reason for subjecting yourself to that.

Pretty much this, especially if you have the faintest reason to believe other players may be thinking they can get away with similar behavior. However--assuming they are otherwise a decent person--if you have reason to believe they've taken the matter to heart, sincerely apologized to all affected players(which doesn't just include the harassed players), and are intent on playing respectfully, giving them a chance to prove themselves first is reasonable. That being said, I'm not optimistic about a player who's gone to the "it's what my character would do" defense, so bust out the speech the exact moment you get a whiff of more inappropriate behavior.

If they are not an otherwise decent person, you don't need to do any of this because they shouldn't be at your next session or any other sessions after that. There's no need to aggravate yourself with this kind of player. Let them know they're not welcome back and don't give them any further information on session times/locations.

[N7Paladin]

This is why I'm always suspicious of anyone playing a bard, bc most often than not, they turn out to be those horny characters. Those kind of players are so gross.

The problem isn't in the book. The problem is at the table, starting with the H. bard player.

In my experience, players who choose to play bards, or any character like that, have something up with them. They either use their character to do what they wish they could do in a bad way, or there's something not quite right about them, or they take their socially awkward selves and play at a table whose other players are probably varying degrees of normal. The kicker is that the horny bard players have creeper minds and weird little egos which 1) prevent them from keeping themselves in check as to what is socially and morally acceptable to do (at the very least there are lines that shouldn't be crossed), and 2)don't see anything wrong with their pervy and utterly pathetic behavior.

The second issue I see is that upon speaking to the perv and seeing he wasn't budging, DM should have said the books are guidelines; DM has final say. Regardless of that, no the book doesn't say anything about playing bards like that, and that kind of pathetic behavior should always be morally and publicly reprehensible. DM should say, to take a long cold shower before each game, seriously consider his life choices, apologize to the table and change his behavior, or he's out.

Problem players need to listen and change whatever needs to be changed, or get another table.

I hope this works out for you

[Galaxander]

Everyone's responses have been on point.

Imagine if someone was playing a barbarian and was just constantly yelling at and berating the other players and said it was because barbarians are supposed to be mad. Like first, that's not what the rules mean at all, and second we're trying to have fun here, and you're being horrible to be around.

The bard thing is even worse than that example, of course, but maybe seeing it from a different perspective will get it through their head.