PDA

View Full Version : New DMing Problem



Burley
2008-02-28, 03:39 PM
Hey, folks. I gots me a problem. A long one...
I'm gonna be running a campaign in Dawnforge, and I'm having issues. Well, one main issue really.
One of the players (who happens to be my best friend) volunteered to play the healer, so, everybody else started making their characters. Now, after everybody has given me their concepts, he's saying he wants to be front-line melee/healer... So, instead of being a Shaper, like he told everybody, he's taking his first level in Fighter. I'm starting them at first level, and he's playing the healer with no way to heal people, just because he wants weapon proficiency.
I asked him why. His character concept is: "I'm a Trueborn prince, who ran away from the crown because my father is on his deathbed and I'm not ready to be king. So, now, I'm trying to get world experience to be better suited at ruling."
Okay...Trueborn=Kingsmarch, yes? How many kings are there in this country? It's not like there are a lot, right? So, I'm pretty sure that (aside from him automatically deciding that he's an extremely important political figure) somebody would be chasing after him, bad guys and good guys, trying to capture/kill him. He's first bloody level and he thinks he'll get away with it. They aren't Gestalt, and it's a 28 point buy... he's gonna be a level behind what they need with stats that won't support both classes.

So, I told him "No." As I told the entire group: "Play whatever character you want, as long as you have an acceptable backstory." And, he's angry because I won't accept it. I said there is no way I'm running a game with that much political noir involvement, because I'm too new to do that. So, he pouts. He said: "Well, why don't you just build an NPC and I'll take over when you're done with it." So, I told him to build whatever the hell he wanted (okaying alternate class features with me first) and I'm going to completely ignore any backstory about him being a prince or anything.

He tried to do the same thing the other time I ran a campaign. Last time, it was a homebrewed world. The main concept of the world was that Druids and Barbarians were, in fact, druids and barbarians. They didn't use metal, they spoke a different language (druidic instead of common) and they hated being inside cities. I took the fluff and made it rules, and he almost quit. I told him that he could do what he wanted, but he'd be shunned by the "civilized" because he was a heathen, and he'd be exiled from the barbarians because of his sacrilege.

All I wanna know: Am I being too hard headed? I know the whole point is for everybody to have fun, but I already told him I'm not compromising for him without just cause. It's not fun for me, but he's my best (and practically only friend since I've left college) and I can't screw that up...

Shishnarfne
2008-02-28, 03:50 PM
Well, it looks like you have a case of a stubborn player... which can be fine, but it can be trouble if he really tries to run against the setting you're trying to establish. I'd suggest finding a time to take him aside and calmly talk to him about the setting that you are using, bringing up why you chose the setting and its advantages, and slowly bring up the topic of making sure that people play characters in line with the setting... Eventually, you come to the example of his character: "I like your idea, it shows that you've put a fair bit of thought into this, but I think that it just doesn't seem very likely to work well for this setting. Could you play something else and save this character idea for another setting?"

By allowing him the out of playing the character later, you might be able to save the setting's verisimilitude (gee, I hope I spelled that correctly). Also, you can point out the importance of a well-played healer in a group, and point out that the rest of the group made their characters expecting to have a healer (btw, how does a Shaper (psion discipline?) heal?), and that it would make it much more difficult to adventure without someone capable of at least using a CLW wand...


Also, you can try to calmly point out the difficulties with his backstory, and that, while, yes, the heir running off incognito to get experience is a common theme in many console RPGs (I have 3 guesses where he got his idea), it doesn't match what you hoped to achieve in your setting. (Perhaps the son of a noble might allow similar hooks without as many knives in the dark looking for him?)

Are you being too hard-headed? Probably not, if I were in your campaign. Possibly, depending on who plays in yours... The key is to talk to him, and ask why he wishes to play each character, and try to figure out if there's a way that you can both adjust a little bit to get the game rolling.

its_all_ogre
2008-02-28, 03:50 PM
no you're not.
have him be deluded into thinking he is this important person, when in fact he is not!
alternatively ask if anyone else wants to play the healer instead.

valadil
2008-02-28, 04:01 PM
I think you're being reasonable with the prince thing, but not so much with the druid world. That's the past though, so let's focus on his new character.

It sounds like you have a motivated player who wants to play an involved character. That's a good thing. However, I can respect that you don't feel up to the task of handling that much politics in one game, and your friend should respect that too.

I think banning the character because the player is being presumptuous is only going to offend your friend. You need to tell him it's an awesome character concept ... for another game. It doesn't fit with what you have in mind for this game. You'd have to halfass your way through the tangle of politics, and ultimately that would ruin what was potentially a great character. That said, I think you should offer to run a game around that character in the future, just not this one. (That is of course assuming your other players can handle a main character besides themselves.)

Finally, I think it was rude of him to tell people he was the healer and change his mind after they committed to that. But it's really not a big deal. Go a little easier on them than you usually would. What if he did start with a cleric and it died? Would you force him to play another cleric because the group needs one? Of course not. The group will manage.

Burley
2008-02-28, 04:03 PM
Well, I think I took too many liberties in that post. Okay:
Dawnforge is a printed campaign setting from when the world is VERY new. So new, in fact, that there are no gods yet. So, without gods, there are no Clerics or Druids or Monks (which all are sorta divine). Instead, there are Shapers, Shamans and Spirit Adepts, respectively. Shaper is like a Cleric, but spontaneous, picks domains kinda like a specialist wizard (pick this and this, can't use that and that) and get metamagic for free at certain levels. So, that's how it's a healer....it is the campaigns healer. :smalltongue:

As for talking to him about it...I did that to the point that I don't want to see his face anymore. He said he wanted to be a paladin, but doesn't like turn/rebuke powers, so, he'd play the shaper (which doesn't have those powers). So, I told him to pick an alternate class feature that'd do away with the turning. Instead he picked one that sacrifices his spellcasting for bonus feats ever few levels, which negates his ability to use wands and scrolls, too. So..."Isn't that defeating the point of being healer?" I asked him. "You just don't understand my character!" He shouted. Shouted...like a little emo brat, which he isn't. He really thought I was trying to punch holes in his character, after trying to help him.

So, he explains the whole prince thing, and I say "No" and now I...lost my train of thought.

The point is: I tried talking to him, and it's not working.

Maybe I'll try to convince him just be a noble instead.

Dervag
2008-02-28, 04:10 PM
From what you're saying, I get the feeling that while this person is being unreasonably sensitive and stubborn, you're being too authoritarian, too.

"He said he wanted to be a paladin... So, I told him to add..."
(emphasis added).

Now, I obviously don't know the details because you haven't told them to me. But depending on what you mean by "told him," it's entirely possible that he has every reason to be frustrated with that kind of thing. Likewise, it's possible that you don't understand his character, and that he's as annoyed by dealing with you are you are by dealing with him. At least as far as I know.

Part of the problem seems to be that while you are very interested in running settings that do unconventional things to D&D classes, your friend wants to be able to stick to the default rules he's familiar with.

Shishnarfne
2008-02-28, 04:20 PM
Alright, given the context, I think I can say that this is a friend you can conveniently "forget" to tell about the next time that you plan on running a game.

Ok, so maybe that's a bit harsh of me to say, but I think that it's fairly clear that he gets very attached to his characters, very quickly, before he even gets to start playing them. So, perhaps, I would say that he is very used to playing practically whatever character he chooses in every game, and that it might be wise to only have him play in such games.

Also, one correction to his logic: it isn't his character until the game starts. As a DM (and maybe I'm a touch more authoritarian than some), I have one unbreakable rule: thou shalt not attempt to deceive the DM. This means that I ask players to run their characters by me, and I may give suggestions relevant to the campaign, and flat-out disallow material that I consider too powerful relative to the other characters. (Which, IMHO, is the most relevant form of balance.) So, I have told players on introducing their character, "No, you can't take Vow of Poverty this campaign, because the treasure output is limited, and I don't have time to rebalance it for the amount of treasure that I expect you to get. Had you told me last week, during character creation, I would have probably been more than happy to work something out, but I don't have time to decide this now."

It's his character when you say "Yes, that's the character you can run in my game." Until then, it's his character concept. He should be able to come up with another one...

So, maybe you could find some campaigns in which his style of play won't be a problem, or you can find non-D&D ways to hang out with him... You don't have to stop spending time with him just because you don't want to DM for him... but it might be wise to tell him that you are too likely to argue with him in campaigns, and that's why you prefer that he not actually play in your campaigns...

Burley
2008-02-28, 04:22 PM
From what you're saying, I get the feeling that while this person is being unreasonably sensitive and stubborn, you're being too authoritarian, too.

"He said he wanted to be a paladin... So, I told him to add..."
(emphasis added).

Now, I obviously don't know the details because you haven't told them to me. But depending on what you mean by "told him," it's entirely possible that he has every reason to be frustrated with that kind of thing. Likewise, it's possible that you don't understand his character, and that he's as annoyed by dealing with you are you are by dealing with him. At least as far as I know.

Part of the problem seems to be that while you are very interested in running settings that do unconventional things to D&D classes, your friend wants to be able to stick to the default rules he's familiar with.

Here's what I understand about his character: He's wanting to be the only son of the only king of the largest most powerful nation in the world...without DM's permission. Also, he's wanting to run away from the throne while his father is dying...without any thought that...I dunno...say, the kingdom may collapse into total anarchy?

The "I told"s aren't "Do this now"s. He asked to be a paladin without turning, so, I TOLD him he needed to find the alternate ability to trade for his turnings. I could care less if he takes paladin and doesn't use the turnings, but I don't want him to complain about losing a class ability. Yeah, I TOLD him to do something to help his character be more exciting to him. My bad...

Besides, telling people and commanding people are two different things. I can tell somebody the sky is blue, but I'm not commanding them to believe it. Telling is not an adjective, it is a verb. It does not describe the way I spoke, rather it shows that I did, in fact, speak.

So...there. :smalltongue:
That sounded very mean just now, and I didn't mean that. But, I'm a nice person, and I've been extremely generous with him and the other players up until this point (extremely generous), so, I get very defensive when I'm accused of being controlling. It's actually what this player/friend is accusing me of now...so...you can understand my consternation, I hope.

Rachel Lorelei
2008-02-28, 04:25 PM
But, I'm a nice person, and I've been extremely generous with him and the other players up until this point (extremely generous), so, I get very defensive when I'm accused of being controlling. It's actually what this player/friend is accusing me of now...so...you can understand my consternation, I hope.

Of course. It can't possibly be your fault. You're doing everything right. Obviously his feelings are totally pulled out of thin air. In fact, there is no problem, everything is going fine, and it's all his fault if it's not.

That's exaggerated sarcasm, mind you, but mabe you should be less defensive, and less focused on your self-image as "nice" and "extremely generous", and do your best to understand where he's coming from and what exactly he wants. You could even ask him these things, straight up.

Burley
2008-02-28, 04:33 PM
Of course. It can't possibly be your fault. You're doing everything right. Obviously his feelings are totally pulled out of thin air. In fact, there is no problem, everything is going fine, and it's all his fault if it's not.

That's exaggerated sarcasm, mind you, but mabe you should be less defensive, and less focused on your self-image as "nice" and "extremely generous", and do your best to understand where he's coming from and what exactly he wants. You could even ask him these things, straight up.

Yes. I do want to uphold my self-image, because I like being nice. So, you win. I'm extremely defensive about it. I shouldn't be, but I am.

But, the basics of his characters are always: I'm gonna volunteer to be this, but change my mind and be melee during the first session. He played a Centaur Ranger (DM let him completely ignore the LA...because he pouted) that was supposed to be our survivalist/ranged. So, two other players made melee, and he showed up with a melee Centaur (have you SEEN their strength) and closed down the campaign.
He did the same thing to my last campaign, trying to play a Druid who lived in the city and all this other stuff that sounds great in the movies, but not on my DM notes. And, he convince the other players that I was a bad DM because it was my first time and they should all look for a new DM.

He's my best friend, and we hang out constantly. So, our lover's spat is completely at the game table...(our other spats aren't allowed at the game table).
I sent him an email suggesting he play a noble instead of a prince. Thanks to everybody who helped, even you snarky little goobers who just made me feel stupid. :smalleek: Sometimes stupid can be good...sometimes...

teennerd4684
2008-02-28, 04:54 PM
Well...

Your friend is way out of line with the "dying king as father" thing. That would basically take away the focus from the rest of the characters. That's why when I DM I don't allow them to play characters with royal blood.

If your friend is as stbborn as you portray him (which I kinda doubt, since you probably would get annoyed with him in other settings), then he'll probably won't shoot for the "noble" thing. If he does, then I guess I'm jumping to conclusions about him, and I apologize in advance.

One last thing: I know it wouldn't be ideal to have him post on his thread, but there are two sides to every story, as I implied above.

BRC
2008-02-28, 05:00 PM
I would say you were justified. I feel somewhat hipocrytical saying that because my next character is an imperial heir. But I feel a need to point out a few differences.

1. It's an epic level campaign.
2. Said Empire isn't actually around anymore, it was overthrown. Which means that it's not just a matter of my character waiting around until the current king/emporer dies and he takes over. He needs to re build it, which is made somewhat more difficult by the fact that
3. He needs to reclaim the imperial city and get the crown, both of which make good plot hooks.
Also, my DM said okay.

The way I see it, the player has the right to ask the DM for the moon and the stars. The DM has the right to say how about some cheese and christmas lights instead.

Also, if the guy makes a promise to the group to be the healer, he should be a healer. You don't offer to bring Preztles and end up bringing ice.