Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Passivearmada 06-18-07, 09:44 AM	A DM's Boundaries. something different for every party. i was wondering if this is stripping the rights of a player. let's say that there is a little traitor that worships some baddie like Hextor, and plans to kill the party in their sleep and loot their bodies. should i drop signs to the players that this miht happen, should i try to nudge him in the direction of a goodly path/deity, should i just let em do it, or should i let him try, but create a disturbance, like a wolf attavk right before he kills the forst member? this is a great party, and it would be a shame to have them all die in one night- not even in an epic battle, but a stupid assassination. this player is getting on my nerves, and im on the virge of him being kidnapped by ogre mages :headexplo:plotting::headexplo your advice would be greatly appreciated :)
ShadezofDis 06-18-07, 11:51 AM	Allow a contested bluff vs sense motive. Unless he's got some good bluff (or other social skill, though I'd make the DC higher if it were diplomacy or . . . I dunno what other social skills there are, I'd need to double check *g*) then he'll be giving hints that he's not to be trusted. When the PC throws a hissy fit (it's been my experience that such things WILL happen) just tell them that their character was found out. When he says "But I didn't let on at all!!!" tell him that he doesn't have to ability to not let on, it's best not to try and hoodwink the rogue when you can't bluff you're way past a 3 y/o. However, a DM has gone too far when the DM loses too many players to play. ;)
Meldread 06-18-07, 01:15 PM	Generally speaking what you need is a group of mature players who can handle situations when one or more group members turn against one another. It occasionally happens especially if the group is well aware of the Law/Chaos axis and plays it properly. However, I generally discourage players from preying upon each other simply for the fact that the game should be fun for everyone involved. Still, there is a difference from discouraging behavior and disallowing it. It happens on rare occasions and when it does come up it should always make sense. Dealing with the situation I would handle it somewhat like ShadezofDis. For example: The party is about to enter a dungeon and Vhalina the Halfling Rogue feels slightly afraid of what they might find. Moloch the Human Fighter attempts to "soothe" her worries by telling her that he won't let anything happen to her. I as a DM know that Moloch is fully intending to betray and kill the party down the line. Moloch rolls a bluff check, Vhalina rolls sense motive. If Moloch fails then Vhalina is told, "Although Moloch's words sound comforting there is something about the look he gives you that is unsettling." If Moloch succeeds his bluff check Vhalina is told, "Moloch's words are soothing to hear and he seems as if he is a good and worthy companion to have at your side." Of course if Moloch succeeds you don't have to say anything and to help make it so players don't start metagaming on the off chance Moloch (who has even gone cross class to gain ranks in bluff) isn't screwed on an unlucky roll I would have other party members roll occasional checks as well. So let's say we're in the same situation where Vhalina is frightened and Gregor the Elven Cleric is offering words of assurance. Gregor is fully loyal and a good friend of Vhalina and he rolls a bluff check and she rolls sense motive. If Gregor fails then Vhalina is told, "While Gregor's words sound comforting you can sense that he is doing his best to mask his own feelings of unease." That is the best way to handle it. If players cannot guess at what is going on and die in their sleep, you can say that you've dropped plenty of hints. The fact that the players never guessed or acted on their suspicions... well that is entirely their fault.
ShadezofDis 06-18-07, 01:20 PM	Meldread's way is a great way to present the situation as a DM. :)
Pystian 06-18-07, 03:21 PM	A good group can be really hard to find. I'd say definitely don't let one lame player ruin it if you've got a good thing going. Honestly, I'd say talk to the player out of game. Just about any DM knows that they're largely responsible for the fun, but what a lot of players don't realize is that they should take some of the responsibility for making sure the game is fun for everyone involved as well. A lot of people feel that D&D is partially about escapism, but in my experience, for many young/new players this manifests as playing a Chaotic Evil (or within one step of that) character and seeing how much destruction they can get away with. Does the player/character have any real reason to kill the rest of the party, even out of game? It's definitely not always the DMs fault when it happens, but a group of players should never die needlessly for lame reasons. That's just bad gaming, and no one wants that.
Passivearmada 06-18-07, 09:33 PM	alright i was saying "let's say" as in that this isnt the exact story. i like how you gave the characters names, Meldread :). the trouble PC DM's a campaign of his own, and youd think he's understand- he does, but is a bit selfish in my opinion- he wants to be the center of attention, being a DM or a PC (like in real life :rolleyes:). he's a somewhat inconsistent player, and is always cracking jokes at the table, which gets us all laughing no matter how hard we try to prevent it. he'll also leave the table as he pleases, but only to say "there's this really funny YouTube i want you to see!" hopping on to my computer. i havent really seriously challenged his behavior and the other guy (there are 3 of us, + 2 people still learning, not educated enough to join)cant really help cause itsa 2 against 1. we havent met recently, because the trouble PC is acting all emo as another giant ploy for attention (im sure of this), and when we get the 2 extra recruits, i just miiiiiiiiight kick him out (if he keeps misbehaving[and then itll be 4 on 1]), after dropping a friendly warning. he knows all the rules and is creative, and a shame to lose, but i'll do what i have to do. if personal problems interfere with the game, then i think it's perfectly acceptable not to have him over to my house to roleplay. isn't it?
Meldread 06-18-07, 11:59 PM	Part of being a DM is also being a good manager. You have to know how to deal with problem individuals in such a way that is healthy and constructive to the entire group. Arguably it is the most difficult aspect of being a DM. Personally I think you are going about it the wrong way. You should avoid creating a situation of the group vs an individual. If you have any hope of him remaining with the group, and really he doesn't sound like that bad of a player, you shouldn't put him (or anyone) in a situation where they feel ganged up on. You are the DM and as such you should think of yourself as a manager. What you say goes. Sometimes you have to lay down the law, but it should always be done gently and with tact. You don't want people to harbor bad feelings because that can rip apart a group. Some things you need to ask yourself: Is the player getting on everyone's nerves? Is he a general annoyance for everyone or is it just you? (NOTE: You shouldn't go behind the player's back and ask the other players this... if such happens to get back to the player you are questioning it could lead to a rather harsh confrontation.) Is the player contributing anything to the group and if he is what would the group be like if he leaves? If the player leaves the group how will it affect the mood of the group? All of the above questions should be easy to answer. If he's annoying people it should be apparent. You should be able to read it on their faces. I don't see the cracking of jokes at the table which results in everyone laughing a major problem. It might be slightly distracting or immersion breaking, but overall it could be worse. You could have a player that cracks jokes that no one thinks is funny and most find offensive, yet he could think of himself as a laugh riot and be completely oblivious to the fact that no one else is laughing. Personally by what you've said I don't think you have a bad player. I think he's just bored. If he was truly having a good time then he wouldn't be leaving the table to look at YouTube or cracking jokes because he'd be too busy playing the game. His attempts to be the center of attention may simply be ways of trying to amuse himself or redirect things toward something he'd feel was more interesting. My suggestion is to approach it like this: Take into consideration the feelings and thoughts of the other players. Then approach the problem player and ask him if he's enjoying playing the game because you keep getting the feeling that he's bored. If he claims that he isn't bring up the cracking of jokes and getting up to go look at YouTube. Pressure him into being "honest" about how he feels and ask for "suggestions" on how to improve your game so he'd find it more enjoyable. That should give you insights on what he is thinking and how he is feeling without being confrontational. You can then slightly adjust the way things work to better keep him focused on the game instead of other things. While I'm at it I would also ask the other players what they thought of my style of DMing and if they had any suggestions on how I could make things more enjoyable for them. Taking it all into consideration some adjustments might be in order. Even if this doesn't fully correct the problem players behavior he should at least (for awhile) be more aware of his cracking of jokes and getting up from the table. If he continues to be a problem then it would be time to address it directly by asking him to stop. Don't get into a debate over anything. If he wants to argue or defend his behavior make it clear that you want him to stop because it is distracting to you. (Do not include the others in the argument even if they are also distracted, because like I said you don't want the player to feel as if he's being ganged up on.) When you speak to him ask him to remain after the other players leave so you can talk to him alone. Don't do it in front of the other players as it risks them being dragged in incase their is an argument. You should do your best to avoid arguments and make it clear: You're house, you're rules. If the player STILL ignores you after you bluntly asked him to stop then after that final game session speak to the other players about how you're feeling and tell them that you are thinking about asking the player to not return to the game. See how they feel about it. After you get the general feeling of the group contact the problem player and basically make it clear that the group feels it is best that he not return. When you ask him to not return you should make it clear that it wasn't just your decision but the groups decision. Occasionally you have a player, especially one who likes drama, who will contact other members of the group and try and play the victim card. Don't tolerate it. Make it a unanimous decision and cut your losses. If he feels that the group as a whole agreed that it was the best course of action he will most likely not try and cause further problems.
Meldread 06-19-07, 12:14 AM	I should also say that a DM should never have getting rid of a player as one of their priorities. It should always be something done as a last resort. Even if the entire group finds a player distracting or annoying, it can be demoralizing to everyone to try and have fun right after someone has been kicked out of the group. As a DM you should do everything you can to try and incorporate the player into the group. The best way to figure out how to do that is to talk to the player about what he finds enjoyable and what he doesn't. Speak to the other players and see what they find enjoyable and what they do not. Once you know that ask yourself what YOU find enjoyable and then work to create a gaming style that attempts to suit as many people in the group as possible. Try and give everyone a little bit of everything. Having an open line of communication with your players is always critical and the ability to not take things personally is essential. However, you also need to know when to assert DM Authority - laying down the law is sometimes necessary.
ShadezofDis 06-19-07, 10:02 AM	As a DM you should do everything you can to try and incorporate the player into the group. The only point I'd like to make that runs counter to your argument is that as a DM, I'm a DM, not a daddy. :) However, I do agree that one should speak to the "problem player" first and see if an understanding can be reached, if the player doesn't go along then I'd kick. Of course I have 7 players and others interested so it wouldn't be a big deal for my group. ;)
captaincarot 06-19-07, 10:41 AM	once lost an entire party to an argument between a druid and a rogue it was hillarious. ended up clearing an entire block with lightning bolts and fireballs going off all over the place best bar room brawl they ever started. the people playing it were in fits of laughter while they knocked the hell out of each other. and the best thing is the only 2 who survived were the druid and the rougue who started it. though if you have one person who is going to do something like that and you know it's going to cause bad feeling with the rest, have a dragon eat his charachter shortly before he gets the chance to do it. alternatively you can have a giant use him as a club against the fighter, that one always goes down well especially if it's a halfling being used as a weapon.
Passivearmada 06-19-07, 11:43 AM	i understand everything that you're saying meldread, and only 1 out of 3 of his jokes are actually funny. when we don't laugh, he'll get bored, i notice. the other guy tends to roll his eyes and cross his arms when PP (problem player)cracks a dumb joke. in this match, a major NPC was killed off (i had planned this out, and yes, it is a big role in the plot), and I wanted the PCs to watch him die, or hold him in their arms, listening to his last gurgled words. PP thought it was stupid that this guy was killed off, and cracked a stupid joke. i'll give you the exact situation. in the campaign just before this one, he was a half-orc barabarian. he went into some crazy rage and tried to kill his companions, almost succeeding, but we scraped by, because we ran right when he went into the rage. im worried he'll try this again, because he really didnt care that he almost killed us, and actually thought it was hilarious. in this new campaign, he is an elf ranger with a little fighter in him. he loves his wolf more than the party that his player has been in for 3 years (before the campaign started), and actually ran to his barely injured wolf after the battle rather than the fallen comrade. i understand his reasonings, and everything, but he really didnt care about the dead guy. that makes me wonder how he'll react if other people do things he doesnt like. this guy is LN, but, if PP keeps misbehaving, i will ask him to stop, and if refuses to yield, i might kill off his wolf, and maybe the character will realize that he has greater friends than an animal. i dont want to kill his pet, but will if necessary. if worst comes to worst, then im sure i could replace him soon, but like i said, i really dont want to do that. i think he will understand if i speak with him, because he is smart and understanding, but i think with 4 people (i wasnt drawing lines, meldread, i was trying to say that 4 people asking him to stop would be more influencing than 2, but i guess it came out wrong ;)), he's also realize that without these allies, he would die in a heartbeat. i dont think he's getting bored, and like i said, it's his persojality to have everyone's attention. this isn't just me, people have talked to me, including his sister, who claims that he's been having major emotional conflicts with his dad. we keep telling him that we're there to help him, but he wants to believe that we dont mean it. why? i dont know, and i hope it's a phase. (in more frank words, he's a poser emo, with major problems, but ones that can be solved by a few simple words). i think that we need to deal with his more personal problems, before returning to the table, because im almost certain that this is what's causing his behavior. thanks for your advice, especially you, meldread. if you guys have anything else to say, feel welcome. :)
captaincarot 06-19-07, 11:49 AM	when playing a ranger you should go to your animal companion first. it would be like not checking on your brother or sister first they are part of the family.
Passivearmada 06-19-07, 12:38 PM	i just spoke with him, and he was completely cool with it- he'll behave
Meldread 06-19-07, 04:50 PM	That's good. I just really hate to see groups fall a part because of real life conflict and drama. I've heard some real horror stories - physical fights breaking out, loss of friendships, all sorts of horrible things. It's hard to give out good advice when you're not there personally and can't observe the entire situation and the context in which things are happening. However, I'm glad things seem to have worked out nicely.
95 06-20-07, 09:14 PM	there is some really great advice to new DM's in this thread..... hopefully quite a few people use it to their advantage
Dr_Tough 06-21-07, 12:44 AM	The most important thing is that a DM has gone too far when the players aren't having fun anymore. A DM has also gone too far when he allows someone to play a PC whose goal is to kill the other PCs. This is pretty much begging for people to be at each other's throats which can kill a game quick. Now, the PCs can have different goals, but they shouldn't be trying to kill each other.
Passivearmada 06-21-07, 09:25 AM	thank you so much, you guys. and i do understand your point of view, captaincarot, its just that the wolf barely lost any health- he was still conscios and just fine. i mean, i think it would have been better to bring the still walking wolf over to his comrade- but thats not my decision. soon, i hope to get more roleplaying opportunities, ones involving tough choices that will be a challenge to decide, and determine a lot for the future. ;) :plotting: ;) and i cant agree with you more, 95, I learned some things here, and all DM's that are troubled should take a look at this post. i would especially like to thank meldread- you've been a huge (no- colossal :P) help to me. :)
captaincarot 06-21-07, 11:47 AM	i see your point mr passive about summoning the wolf over it would have been the right thing to do. i didn't realise it was so lightly harmed. but the first place a ranger should look afer a battle is at his animal companion in my mind, then if it's still up and on it's feet check the rest of your companions.