Murder Hobo advice

[Sigreid]

There's also to the group as a whole stating "The road you're going down is going to mark you all as the villains in some hero's story. Are you all ok with that?"

[Willowhelm]

The other thing about having divine intervention or OP NPCs fight them is it teaches (in my opinion) the wrong lesson. It's teaching that the only reason not to do the bad thing is because a someone else who is bigger and stronger is going to stop you or punish you. Might makes right? That's what you want to impart here?

Let them play out the consequences of their actions and have real feelings and understanding that will actually benefit them. Sure, this can be fantastical - the ghosts that haunt them and visit their dreams. It can be mechanical - their long rests no longer work is they fail a wisdom save against the ghosts haunting etc.

But those are just ways to reflect the consequences of the actions in game and force the player to confront them. (Making them "real" for the player).

[animorte]

Celestials are always fun. Pick a god, any god. That family of villagers just so happened to worship them. And that god hates this sort of injustice, and just so happens to have an army of archons, couatls, and many other beings at their disposal, just for stuff like this.

Good guys fight daemons and devils and reveal their machinations.

Bad guys? Well, they still get whomped, but it's by angels. And heroes. And adventurers. And basic bits of society (lords, knights, counts, barons, any of their leiutenants or lackeys, even other evil people and their power groups) will squash stuff like that. Stopping a "bad-guy" enhances their reputation pretty well in the eyes of others, even if they are one themselves, the rest of the time. Fighting flavour-of-the-week evil pays, even if you are evil too. And there's no deeper plot involved. It was just "you were really really bad, in/justice has cometh to thee!".
And make sure the angels/ societal/ even badder-people take away some of the bad-guy PCs character's toys and/or abilities, so there's mechanical hits for the player's abilities to play like this as well. Maybe they'll even be able to redeem themselves and get their toys back? Maybe....

Problem solved.

That's a really good thing to keep in mind. The monster manual is essentially designed to provide blatant opposition for HEROES. It doesn't give nearly as many meat roadblocks for VILLAINS.

[Tawmis]

Hi all,
So I run D&D for my school's D&D club. For teenagers, most are playing exactly as you'd expect, but I have one student who is really running around as a true murder hobo. I don't have a problem with a player going this route per se, but I do want to find a way to impose meaningful consequences for his actions without it becoming the sole focus of everything that happens. For example, they wanted to help "feed" the local dire spider, so they murdered a family living in a nearby cottage and placed the bodies in the spiders lair.
On the one hand, I could just completely ignore said behaviors, and in the other extreme I could have the guild come under attack from the formal government as they have a member committing wanton murder for fun.
What is a realistic in-between that imposes some meaningful consequences for a player who's main goal is to murder anyone/anything that gets in their way (or things that are not in their way, that they go out of the way to kill)?

There's some great ideas.
But I'd go with one already mentioned - the town guard begins to investigate the murders.
There was someone (a kid works best - I'll say why in a minute) who was a witness (on the way to see said family) and dove in the bushes when they heard screaming and witnessed the players doing it.
The guard questions the players. But perhaps not having enough evidence - and not sure how much to trust the child witness.
They begin tailing the party. Just doing that typical cop thing of following them around.
If the party considers murdering whoever is following them - let them know this will truly make the guards alert to their activities.
Maybe, they encounter the kid witness - who gives the party a sob story of how this was a family that adopted him and saved him from Drow, who had enslaved him and his family. And his family died, so he could escape. So the people they killed were the people who adopted him. Any idea of killing him, would also raise the alert of the guards that the witness turned up dead.

Enforce MILESTONES rather than XP for level, if you haven't already. (This helps decease murder hobo to some degree so they're not killing just to get XP)

[Xervous]

You should avoid doing any of the suggestions that tailor the scenario to the player’s disruptive IC acts. Go over the expectations for the game again if need be.

If another “it’s what my character would do” gets played, ask a few questions to guide them to why it’s nonsensical or potentially unfun. The typical disconnect point is “if your character was so obviously this way, why did the others agree to adventure with you in the first place?”

[MadBear]

Update:
Since my last post we had another session. 2 of the other groups (there are 3 DM's) played out perfectly. I had a conversation with the problem player along with their 2 friends about consequences and why they're actions are leading them down the path of a villain (I say this rather then straight out calling them villains, mostly because I want them to think that pulling back from this path is an option). I also posted a notice on the guild missions that the local town had hired the guild to investigate the murders.

The player opted to double down. He lead his friends back to the town where they specifically looked to find isolated guards and murder them. After that, the went and targeted civilians including children. The session ended with them running away.

Current plan:

1. Out of character, I told them that if they continue down this line, I will take their characters and just make them the new BBEG, since that's what they're playing. His friends agreed that this wasn't really the kinda game they signed up for and wouldn't be killing random people for no reason anymore. The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play.

2. I posted an updated notice that increased the reward for capturing them significantly, and now that witnesses were around, the notice includes details of how they look. The problem player is already hoping to take this mission and find a way to transmute a body to look like him (He doesn't currently have this ability at all). Mostly this notice is there to signal that the world has taken notice and there will be consequences.

3. A reoccuring Revenant will start haunting this player.

[Burley]

1. Out of character, I told them that if they continue down this line, I will take their characters and just make them the new BBEG, since that's what they're playing. His friends agreed that this wasn't really the kinda game they signed up for and wouldn't be killing random people for no reason anymore. The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play.

I still think, if you want to course correct and have it mean something, the spider is the way to do it. A spider has no need for dead bodies, because they eat by injecting venom that liquifies the prey's insides and the venom spreads through the body vascularly. The spider doesn't want pre-dead bodies, which only attract other animals, like carrion feeders or maybe a stray wolf (coyote). If you feel like this is actually a boon to the spider, because it attracts more prey, then it makes sense that the spider would capture any prey that comes around this new bait, including the PC who brings the bait.

When the player insists that the spider wouldn't hurt them, ask what they think a dire spider's INT stat is or if they think it has a lawful alignment. You've warned them about the path they walk. If they insist on walking into a spider's web, entangle them. Its their own fault that the spider uses traps and bait now.

[Xervous]

Update:
Since my last post we had another session. 2 of the other groups (there are 3 DM's) played out perfectly. I had a conversation with the problem player along with their 2 friends about consequences and why they're actions are leading them down the path of a villain (I say this rather then straight out calling them villains, mostly because I want them to think that pulling back from this path is an option). I also posted a notice on the guild missions that the local town had hired the guild to investigate the murders.

The player opted to double down. He lead his friends back to the town where they specifically looked to find isolated guards and murder them. After that, the went and targeted civilians including children. The session ended with them running away.

Current plan:

1. Out of character, I told them that if they continue down this line, I will take their characters and just make them the new BBEG, since that's what they're playing. His friends agreed that this wasn't really the kinda game they signed up for and wouldn't be killing random people for no reason anymore. The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play.

2. I posted an updated notice that increased the reward for capturing them significantly, and now that witnesses were around, the notice includes details of how they look. The problem player is already hoping to take this mission and find a way to transmute a body to look like him (He doesn't currently have this ability at all). Mostly this notice is there to signal that the world has taken notice and there will be consequences.

3. A reoccuring Revenant will start haunting this player.

While I’m not there, it looks like the problem player is taking the focus on his actions as encouragement. Dog whines: dog gets let outside. Kid takes out trash: kid gets screen time. Kid acts out: kid gets attention in the form of the game focusing on his character.

Don’t solve this though in game methods. It’s likely any future in game attempts to change the player’s mindset will get misinterpreted as positive reinforcement of the behavior.

The issue you have is the player is not trying to play the same game as the others. Clarify things at a player level so it can’t be confused for being another round of his character being in the spotlight.

[Cygnia]

Yeah, actions have consequences. Kicking the murder hobo out of the club IS a consequence.

[Sigreid]

Update:
Since my last post we had another session. 2 of the other groups (there are 3 DM's) played out perfectly. I had a conversation with the problem player along with their 2 friends about consequences and why they're actions are leading them down the path of a villain (I say this rather then straight out calling them villains, mostly because I want them to think that pulling back from this path is an option). I also posted a notice on the guild missions that the local town had hired the guild to investigate the murders.

The player opted to double down. He lead his friends back to the town where they specifically looked to find isolated guards and murder them. After that, the went and targeted civilians including children. The session ended with them running away.

Current plan:

1. Out of character, I told them that if they continue down this line, I will take their characters and just make them the new BBEG, since that's what they're playing. His friends agreed that this wasn't really the kinda game they signed up for and wouldn't be killing random people for no reason anymore. The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play.

2. I posted an updated notice that increased the reward for capturing them significantly, and now that witnesses were around, the notice includes details of how they look. The problem player is already hoping to take this mission and find a way to transmute a body to look like him (He doesn't currently have this ability at all). Mostly this notice is there to signal that the world has taken notice and there will be consequences.

3. A reoccuring Revenant will start haunting this player.

Are you sure the problem player isn't a problem person? I've done some messed up stuff in the game, but that bolded part is the reasoning of an actual sociopath.

[MadBear]

Are you sure the problem player isn't a problem person? I've done some messed up stuff in the game, but that bolded part is the reasoning of an actual sociopath.

That's something I'm genuinely concerned about actually (but for other reasons). Separately, there is a likely phone call home to parents to discuss this and other red flags.

[Kurt Kurageous]

"I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil".

Sigreid is right, this is classic sociopath. I'm not a mental health professional, but as we might say here in Texas, "That ain't normal!" I'd have to report it if it had happened in my club.

Depending on your state, you may be required to contact some kind of child protective services (out of an abundance of caution, of course), as the child may be disturbed. I'm not sure I'd want to keep playing with him, nor would I think the parents of the other kids would be happy about it. You may be playing with fire here. I think it's time you started managing the risk.

[Tawmis]

Or...

They're just being a kid and wanting to excuse their behavior in game, to act the way they did.

I just ran a game, with one kid in it, and two adults. All three new to D&D.

The kid just wanted to keep unarmed striking the giant rats, even though as a rogue, he'd clearly do more damage with his dagger.

But he thought it was funnier - because it was sillier.

Yeah, that's not murdering fictional people to give to a fictional giant spider...

But I feel like the idea is the same. They're just looking for a way to be disruptive, because they think it's funny.

[Sigreid]

Or...

They're just being a kid and wanting to excuse their behavior in game, to act the way they did.

I just ran a game, with one kid in it, and two adults. All three new to D&D.

The kid just wanted to keep unarmed striking the giant rats, even though as a rogue, he'd clearly do more damage with his dagger.

But he thought it was funnier - because it was sillier.

Yeah, that's not murdering fictional people to give to a fictional giant spider...

But I feel like the idea is the same. They're just looking for a way to be disruptive, because they think it's funny.

Definitely possible that he's just trying to be as edgy as he can. It's still a concerning line of reasoning to come up with. Wouldn't be concerning at all if he straight said "I'm just having fun playing evil".

[Frogreaver]

Update:
Since my last post we had another session. 2 of the other groups (there are 3 DM's) played out perfectly. I had a conversation with the problem player along with their 2 friends about consequences and why they're actions are leading them down the path of a villain (I say this rather then straight out calling them villains, mostly because I want them to think that pulling back from this path is an option). I also posted a notice on the guild missions that the local town had hired the guild to investigate the murders.

The player opted to double down. He lead his friends back to the town where they specifically looked to find isolated guards and murder them. After that, the went and targeted civilians including children. The session ended with them running away.

Current plan:

1. Out of character, I told them that if they continue down this line, I will take their characters and just make them the new BBEG, since that's what they're playing. His friends agreed that this wasn't really the kinda game they signed up for and wouldn't be killing random people for no reason anymore. The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play.

Well done. I'm kind of curious what greater purpose he thinks feeding people to a giant spider serves?

2. I posted an updated notice that increased the reward for capturing them significantly, and now that witnesses were around, the notice includes details of how they look. The problem player is already hoping to take this mission and find a way to transmute a body to look like him (He doesn't currently have this ability at all). Mostly this notice is there to signal that the world has taken notice and there will be consequences.

It seems to me that structuring most of the actual gameplay around his actions is letting him drive the narrative while the other players lack agency to steer the game away from such play. In a sense, this kind of in game 'consequence' is only enabling said behavior by providing him agency to continue having fun doing it.

3. A reoccuring Revenant will start haunting this player.

Now that you know the problem I'm not really sure focusing on in game consequences for his bad actions is a solution to that problem. It's just enabling the game to revolve more and more around him.

[Foolwise]

This brings back memories of my teenaged D&D group that ended because my paladin was investigating a goblin church inside a dungeon when the two squishier party members were being attacked in another part of the dungeon. The DM wanted me to immediately run over and save them, but I argued my paladin would be too engrossed with this heathen religion. When he then said my paladin heard the fighting, I argued against that, noting we went in different directions and the numerous feet of stone and earth would prevent the sound from reaching me. Hindsight, he should have leaned into the religious bit and had some divine intervention lead me to the fight. But instead our stubbornness got the better of us and that was our last session.

Rather tame compared to kids these days and yet the kids play on.

[BullyWog]

One person earlier said "I'm not a mental health professional but... "Well I am a psychiatrist and this is my two cents worth.
A lot of adolescents will I push the envelope and test limits. It's the job of a good parent, a good teacher, a good counselor, a good responsible adult, to know what's a reasonable limit and what isn't. This player seems to have gone way past the limit and limits need to be set and enforced. Most things are very complicated but this seems fairly straightforward. This group is about having fun and group process I believe. I'm pretty sure this is not supposed to be an evil campaign. It is certainly the DM's prerogative to change a character's alignment when the situation dictates. I think the DM should say this is an evil character this is not an evil campaign and so the player needs to either re-roll the character or agree to a quest for rehabilitation and realignment. Probably this player cannot fit into the group, possibly they can, but this character cannot fit into the group and continuing to make the campaign about reining in this character is just counterproductive to fostering good group dynamics.

[Cygnia]

Any new updates yet about this game?

[Sigreid]

One person earlier said "I'm not a mental health professional but... "Well I am a psychiatrist and this is my two cents worth.
A lot of adolescents will I push the envelope and test limits. It's the job of a good parent, a good teacher, a good counselor, a good responsible adult, to know what's a reasonable limit and what isn't. This player seems to have gone way past the limit and limits need to be set and enforced. Most things are very complicated but this seems fairly straightforward. This group is about having fun and group process I believe. I'm pretty sure this is not supposed to be an evil campaign. It is certainly the DM's prerogative to change a character's alignment when the situation dictates. I think the DM should say this is an evil character this is not an evil campaign and so the player needs to either re-roll the character or agree to a quest for rehabilitation and realignment. Probably this player cannot fit into the group, possibly they can, but this character cannot fit into the group and continuing to make the campaign about reining in this character is just counterproductive to fostering good group dynamics.

When I made my comment I was thinking that the OP might want to just watch and see if this is a kid trying to be the edgiest of Edge Lords or if there were other things not related to the game that would raise concern. The OP indicated that this was just one thing that worries them a bit. Of course, none of us have met this kid or the OP for that matter.

[Burley]

One person earlier said "I'm not a mental health professional but... "Well I am a psychiatrist and this is my two cents worth.
A lot of adolescents will I push the envelope and test limits. It's the job of a good parent, a good teacher, a good counselor, a good responsible adult, to know what's a reasonable limit and what isn't. This player seems to have gone way past the limit and limits need to be set and enforced. Most things are very complicated but this seems fairly straightforward. This group is about having fun and group process I believe. I'm pretty sure this is not supposed to be an evil campaign. It is certainly the DM's prerogative to change a character's alignment when the situation dictates. I think the DM should say this is an evil character this is not an evil campaign and so the player needs to either re-roll the character or agree to a quest for rehabilitation and realignment. Probably this player cannot fit into the group, possibly they can, but this character cannot fit into the group and continuing to make the campaign about reining in this character is just counterproductive to fostering good group dynamics.

+1

I run the Tabletop Gaming club at the school where I work and, sure, we have kids that act up a bit. And, while dark thoughts could be a sign of something greater, remember that this is a kid who is voluntarily playing a game. They're not anti-social or abusive to their peers. They're just trying to have a crazy fantasy experience.

Don't treat the kid like a psychopath or they'll start to act like a psychopath. This is a young game enthusiast and, if you kick them out and call them a crazy trash person, they'll act like that in the future, expecting to be kicked out as the eventual, natural result of their involvement in the hobby. That's how trolls are made.

Fix this problem in character. If the character is the problem, kill the character, or otherwise remove it from the player's control. Then, let the player try again, with a character who wouldn't kill random families. Give them as many chances as you can to get it right, because that's the way we should treat our friends.
(Frankly, I'll bet this kid's teachers see him as a "problem child" with "behavior issues," and I'll bet dimes-to-dollars that they tell this kid exactly that, to his face. He's used to being treated like a problem, so, he plays the role he's expected to play. That's the way he's been trained to receive attention and, if you want to be a good role model, you should be showing him an alternative.)

[Keravath]

I agree with the folks suggesting that the problem has gone beyond the point where it can be appropriately dealt with by in game consequences.

The comments and actions of the player have shown that they do not care at all about in game consequences. They seem to be enjoying being the center of attention and driving the game narrative by their actions, causing the guild to react with wanted posters just makes their character famous or infamous. "Doubling down" may well be the player rebelling against any form of authority and pushing the limits to see what the "teacher" will do. The "teacher" can't just stand aside, try to apply in-game solutions, and expect any other effect than the player to continue with their actions.

I don't think the following will work - but it is the only sort of in game approach that might be effective (if the player can even be convinced to play differently).

An in-game solution needs to absolutely prevent the character from doing the things they are trying to do, and prevent them from driving the narrative, making the character effectively unplayable as they currently are - (1) Whenever the character tries to kill an innocent person, a revenent of one of the earlier victims steps in the way, grabbing the weapon and preventing ANY action that harms innocents - basically, in game mechanic that prevents the unacceptable behaviour. (2) Another adventuring party kills off the spider so they lose their tenuous justification - make it clear that the dead bodies of all the villagers made the town think the spider was participating and had become a threat to the village (do NOT use an actual group to do this - narrate it off screen - you do not want the player to fixate on some other students killing their spider - have him blame the DMs. However, that sort of solution might be much more of a problem if the player has other issues.

The DM has already explained to the player, out of character, that this is not the type of game they signed up for, that the behavior isn't acceptable but the response is ...

"The problem player doubled down, saying that they're actions weren't evil, because and I quote "I'm feeding their bodies to a giant spider, and a greater purpose like that overrides the action from being considered wrong or evil". I let him know that regardless, he's playing a game that no one else is ok with, and he needs to change, or he needs to be ok with the other players no longer working with him and therefore him not actually getting to play."

I'm not a psychologist, none of us are there, I would not make any sort of statement whether this represents a red flag of anything more significant ... but the fact that the situation has been explained, that the behavior won't work in this game, that the character actions are not compatible with the group and yet the player still wants to persist playing that way, really sounds like a fight for power. Is the DM in charge of the game or is the player in charge by using their character actions to drive the narrative? The longer the player strings along the DM, the more they win. It is certainly anti-social but they were able to convince two of the other players to go along with their actions - which gives them even more of a win.

The DM probably needs to have a 1:1 chat with the player (with another adult present as a witness - it may make the discussion more difficult but if this is a student-teacher power struggle it is safer for all involved to have another adult present in the room) and discuss how they are choosing to play their character but more importantly WHY they are choosing to play that way. There are reasons and the DM (since they are a teacher and have some responsibility for their students) really needs to get a better idea of what is going on since the behavior is beyond typical in game murder hobo - doubling down several times after it being made clear that the behavior won't work seems to indicate that there is more going on than just playing a game.

[Burley]

I agree with the folks suggesting that the problem has gone beyond the point where it can be appropriately dealt with by in game consequences.
~snip~
There are reasons and the DM (since they are a teacher and have some responsibility for their students) really needs to get a better idea of what is going on since the behavior is beyond typical in game murder hobo - doubling down several times after it being made clear that the behavior won't work seems to indicate that there is more going on than just playing a game.

The "more going on" is that it's a kid. Kid's push boundaries and sometimes don't follow instruction well, especially when their head is in a different place than where they're asked to be. The kid isn't hitting other players. They're "being disruptive" which, in my experience, means they "want attention." When you kick kids out of peer groups for "being disruptive" (rather than being violent or offensive), you're teaching them that they don't belong. If this kid does have something going on, the best place he could possibly be is with you and a small group of peers who are practicing teamwork and exploring the concept of cause-and-effect.

New idea: Maybe instead of treating this kid like he's crazy and calling his parents, you roll with what the character has done (deal with it in-game) and then tell the players "Hey, we went down this plot line with This Kid, so, we're going to take turns and follow a plot line for another character now." Then, if the player tries to steal the spotlight like this when another character is supposed the be the focus, just say "No, we're following the cleric's story right now."


Edit: I know you're not saying "Kick the kid out," Keravath. I was just using your words as a springboard.

[MadBear]

Any new updates yet about this game?

No big update. Our game day is Thursday, which is when we'll have a chance to play again. I have had some longer out of character conversations with the student, which I've relayed to his parents, just out of an abundance of caution in regards to the game + other outside issues which I'm not going to go into. With that said, I'm still fairly confident that he's just trying to be super edgy.

The other thing I have done is talk to the other players away from him, asking them if they're enjoying his characters actions, or finding it a distraction. Pretty universally, they are finding it frustrating to be playing a game where they're either heroes or at least hero adjacent, and having to play with a character whose a sociopath (the character, not the player). So I'm pretty confident in moving away from focusing on his behavior and just letting him know he needs to try out a different character to fit into this game world