Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Darkprophet232 09-23-07, 09:09 PM	This is a fairly complicated situation, so I'll put the question I'm asking right up front, and then the reasoning I have behind it below: Is it all right to heavily advance creatures just to destroy a player's weapons? Now for the situation: I'm a Marine in Iwakuni Japan, and we have a pretty good D&D group ranging from beginners to hardened vets who still cringe whenever we play 3.5. Now the amount of people we get to play on any given night ranges from 3-10 (although I refuse to DM more than 6 for sanity reasons), so some players that can play often, often get very good rewards and exp, while those that miss a lot of days I try to bend over backwards to make up for. Now, we're in a gestalt campaign, where everyone is heavily optimized and 15th level, not the best situation for a DM who prefers mid level, mid power campaigns, but I brought this on myself. One character in particular has been very fortunate to attend every session for the past 2 months or so, and has been able to get a very large amount of exp and loot from this. Another thing leading to his loot is that a player came in, bought only a few items at level 10, and was planning on spending all his loot in town (he had a good role playing reason for this, so I allowed it). Then, this new player turned jerk, and I killed him. I outright killed him, and I doubt anyone would have done any differently in the situation, but now no one in the party wanted to res him (true res is relatively easy to come by, the largest towns have a 10-15% chance of having a cleric capable of casting it, and I rolled very well the first few attempts, so now the players know the clerics on an almost personal level). The player in question grabbed all that loot, putting him very far ahead of the group in terms of cash, then he went out and turned in a rewards the whole party had worked for, but only three or four people were there to pick up. I've put his cash at about 85,000 above where the rest of the party is at. To bring him back in line, I've altered an optional mini boss (a custom made dracolich) to have a pair of advanced Iron Golems as guards. They are also intelligent. I've given them all feats (from the PHB) down the Power attack tree, including Imp Sunder. My goal is to have this character, a front line fighter, charge these golems like he does everything else, deal the insane damage he normally does, then across two rounds walk away with his swords and armor broken, while the rest of the group is busy dealing with the shades, advanced skeletons and the Draco's familiar, before they fight the big guy in the next room. Afterwards, the party will of course get a huge reward for killing the Draco, provided they also destroy the phylactery and bring proof of it. Not to mention a hefty share of gold from the Draco's horde. So, am I really going over the top here, is there a better way to do this other than talking to him about it (he doesn't care and is a bit of a jerk to the other players about cash value, thusly why this encounter is poetic justice to the caster heavy party)?
IdleAltruism 09-23-07, 10:03 PM	Well killing a character outright just because you want to kill them is never the right solution. Anyways..... I never liked loot. I've had lots of problems with greedy groups in the past. Its your job as the DM to balance things out in terms of gold/xp, its also your responsibility to smack players upside the head when they do something stupid. The player in question should have never taken all the loot to begin with(you should have stopped him, it wouldn't have to be in game either. Just say look don't be an *******, if he doesn't like it he can leave). Thats really your own fault and if you don't want to talk to him you're throwing away the easiest way to fix this problem. Deliberately destroying items is usually a really bad idea. There have been occasions where I gave a player to powerful an item, normally once I realize this I make some sort of quest where the item must be consumed to complete it. Just having a great wyrm dragon fly out of no where grab his stuff and break it is just no fun and clearly abusive DM behavior.
Vanraya 09-23-07, 10:08 PM	Usually when I read titles like "Am I going to far?" I automatically think: Yes... But you have a special problem, if I understand correctly, he got ahead in treasure due to a weird scheduling problem? If thats the case it's ok to uh...challenge? the character...but I wouldnt break it. I'd have it stolen and then quested for. That way he can get it back when everyone else is ready. Or break it, but make it reperable (as I believe it would be even if you broke it.)
Darkprophet232 09-23-07, 11:29 PM	Well killing a character outright just because you want to kill them is never the right solution. The situation in question was so bad he is no longer allowed to play with us just because of it. Anyways..... I never liked loot. I've had lots of problems with greedy groups in the past. Its your job as the DM to balance things out in terms of gold/xp, its also your responsibility to smack players upside the head when they do something stupid. The player in question should have never taken all the loot to begin with(you should have stopped him, it wouldn't have to be in game either. Just say look don't be an *******, if he doesn't like it he can leave). Thats really your own fault and if you don't want to talk to him you're throwing away the easiest way to fix this problem. But I have talked to him about it. I sat him down and told him that it was affecting character balance and how that in order to get a decent challenge for him, the rest of the PC are either useless and ineffective or cannon fodder. He understands this and just doesn't care. Deliberately destroying items is usually a really bad idea. There have been occasions where I gave a player to powerful an item, normally once I realize this I make some sort of quest where the item must be consumed to complete it. Just having a great wyrm dragon fly out of no where grab his stuff and break it is just no fun and clearly abusive DM behavior. These weapons aren't special ones that he won, they're swords that he bought with his ill-begotten gains. One is a +3 Keen Flaming scimitar, and the other a +3 Keen Frost Scimitar, (He also has a multitude of other items, ring of prot+5, cloak of res +5, to name but a few). He bought them very far apart from each other so I didn't catch it at the time, and he bought all the items so slowly over a 6 week period that I never really realized what was going on, and worse yet I didn't find out about him getting the 40k from the other character until about 2 weeks ago. And it's not like its a random encounter, the Dracolich is an optional boss, and I've told them he's designed to be done very late game (sadly they aren't catching on and may go after him at only 16th lvl). I've just changed his guards from greater Stone Golems to these advanced Iron ones. Usually when I read titles like "Am I going to far?" I automatically think: Yes... But you have a special problem, if I understand correctly, he got ahead in treasure due to a weird scheduling problem? A lot of us work the airfield hours, or work the chow hall hours, and some of us are shift workers, so its rare that we get everyone together. The Player in question is the head of his department and thusly gets to make his own schedule (case in point, I've worked over 40 hours over the last four days due to manning issues). If thats the case it's ok to uh...challenge? the character...but I wouldnt break it. I'd have it stolen and then quested for. That way he can get it back when everyone else is ready. Or break it, but make it reperable (as I believe it would be even if you broke it.) This type of player is more likely to be ****** off about the weapons, see the treasure from the creature's horde and forget all about them.
GoriceXII 09-24-07, 01:59 AM	I see your problem...this is one reason I don't allow pcs to buy any magical items other than scrolls and potions. (unless they actually know an individual with a magical item specifically) Having them stolen or perhaps disintegrated or something like that might be better. It's unfortunate...this guy could justifiably say "I've earned this stuff through gameplay" as you doubtless know. If it were me I might figure out how to run another game altogether, or just bluntly address the problem and explain that it's going to get unbalanced and won't be any fun for anyone. Sometimes players actually really don't get that, they get very involved in playing their characters.
Tedronai 09-24-07, 02:22 AM	What I would suggest? Blatantly tell this player that you are prepared to 'deal' with this problem in-game, but that he won't like the solution you've come up with. Don't give him details, let him come up with his own nightmare. Then tell him that you'd rather settle the matter OOC, and that it would likely result in a much better result for him if you did. If he's willing to deal, you could simply have him erase a few entries on his sheet, or 'correct' them to lower values, or you could have them taken in trade during an upcoming encounter (in exchange for a high-leveled NPC sparing their lives, perhaps, or performing some vital service for them). I would suggest also demanding some sort of payment from the other PCs in that instance, though it wouldn't necessarily need to be in the form of items or wealth - services rendered, or an undisclosed favour at a later time would also serve to open interesting plot opportunities - or this player may feel no better than if they were simply removed by force. Make sure to discuss the specific items to be lost in this case, as well, for the same reasons, and be willing to negotiate. If he's not willing to solve the problem OOC at that point, go right ahead with the golems. (Just note that RAW, the Sunder action cannot be taken against anything other than held objects, weapons, or shields, so armour, cloaks, rings, etc. are safe. There are, however, several critters that are prefectly capable of dealing with those other items in their own ways - an advanced Bebilith for the armour, for instance - all of which could just as easily be in the service of your Dracolich). Your largest problem in this scenario will be coming up with viable excuses not to have the same fate befall the other characters (who in total already end up being as far behind expected wealth values as this individual is ahead)
calronmoonflower 09-24-07, 02:26 AM	Then, this new player turned jerk, and I killed him. I outright killed him, :OMG! YOU KILLED THE PLAYER!!! You should never kill a player for being a jerk, kill their character instead. :P The first rule with a dungeon master/player problem is talk to them first. That solves 90% of the problems. The second rule is realistic in game consequences. If the player character doesn't conform and stop being an :censored: then you move on to harsher reactions.
Mock26 09-24-07, 02:32 AM	D&D is NOT the Marine Corps. You can't just storm the beaches and blow everything to kingdom come to solve all your problems. No matter how bad a situation gets with a character and the player, killing the character is a childish, immature way to solve a problem. Such solutions are to be expected from children, but not mature adults. Talk to the player in question and tell him that his character is unbalancing the game and you want to work with him to tone down his character.
OleOneEye 09-24-07, 02:56 AM	Is it all right to heavily advance creatures just to destroy a player's weapons? Yep, that is the whole reason for the game including things like Sunder or Mordenkainen's Disjunction. It would be pretty silly, in my opinion, for the PCs to never have their equipment targetted. That said, play it fair and don't just have him automatically target the offending player no matter what, but rather, target the offending player when it is tactically sound for the bad guy to do so. Play the dice straight too, if it hits and destroys than great, if it misses than that's the way it goes.
DMCuindless 09-24-07, 03:49 AM	D&D is NOT the Marine Corps. You can't just storm the beaches and blow everything to kingdom come to solve all your problems. No matter how bad a situation gets with a character and the player, killing the character is a childish, immature way to solve a problem. Such solutions are to be expected from children, but not mature adults. Talk to the player in question and tell him that his character is unbalancing the game and you want to work with him to tone down his character. Have you been reading his posts? The OP has talked to this guy repeatedly. The player acknowledged the issue and stated he doesn't care. The only options I see are in game consequences, like sunder and Modenkainen's Disjunction, or out of game consequences like "You can't game with us any more, jerk!" Personally, if I had talked to the player and he just turned out to be a complete a-hole, I'd boot him. It doesn't sound like you have too limited of a player pool to choose from.
Darkprophet232 09-24-07, 04:10 AM	D&D is NOT the Marine Corps. You can't just storm the beaches and blow everything to kingdom come to solve all your problems. No matter how bad a situation gets with a character and the player, killing the character is a childish, immature way to solve a problem. Such solutions are to be expected from children, but not mature adults. All right, let me explain this situation then, as people are having such hang ups about it. The group just got duped by a succubus into going into an old Silver Dragon's lair that is currently abandoned due to the Silver dragon being hunted. The opening of the lair is the perfect ambush spot for a pair of arrow demons under her employ, and after a decently challenging encounter, the Succubus has teleported away and the Arrow demons are dead. The owner of the Cave (A Great Wyrm Silver Dragon) senses the disturbance at his own cave, and thinking that the hunters are back, goes to have a light meal. Seeing a band of adventurers that are obviously not the hunter's, the Dragon immediately goes from hostile to unfriendly. Thought the first three members of the group (they had started to climb out of the gorge the entrance of the cave was in) were affected by the Frightful presence of the beast. One rolled really well, but not well enough and they all failed. Shaken, these three players stand at the top while the dragon goes down to investigate, and the other three begin a discourse with the Silver Dragon, and they are able to better his mood and for a small payment he tells them where a Blue Dragon's (The Dracolich in question) lair is. This was the real reward for surviving the fight with the succubus, but the problem character gets really, really angry. He wants to fight the Silver Dragon. Why? He never gave a reason, and when the other players tell him they won't fight a helpful creature so far above their means to fight, he goes into a hissy fit begins calling me and the group a bunch of very disgusting names. Very bad. At this point the rest of the group wasn't really warming up to the group as he was anti-group as possible, and had once been kicked out of another group, but we decided to give him another chance after explaining to him why we kicked him out. Anyways, he's making the whole session turn south for everyone, so I tell him his character, so shaken from the sight of the dragon, slips and falls down the cliff side and takes all 20d6 falling damage. Unsurprisingly, he survives, but fails his death from massive damage roll. Then, I asked the table who wanted to raise him, and no one responded. So I told him that his second, and last chance, was used up. He was free to stay and watch but he was not allowed to create another character (I was the one that had convinced the group to allow him back, so I was very angry at this time). He turned real mature real quick, and opted to stay. The rest of the night went by without a hitch, and now (four months later) the group is considering giving him another chance, though whether it will go through is another thing all together. To the rest, thank you very much for your responses. We play my game on Friday, so I still have a few more days to make my decision. I'll take all responses to heart.
DMCuindless 09-24-07, 04:27 AM	All right, let me explain this situation then, as people are having such hang ups about it. The group just got duped by a succubus into going into an old Silver Dragon's lair that is currently abandoned due to the Silver dragon being hunted. The opening of the lair is the perfect ambush spot for a pair of arrow demons under her employ, and after a decently challenging encounter, the Succubus has teleported away and the Arrow demons are dead. The owner of the Cave (A Great Wyrm Silver Dragon) senses the disturbance at his own cave, and thinking that the hunters are back, goes to have a light meal. Seeing a band of adventurers that are obviously not the hunter's, the Dragon immediately goes from hostile to unfriendly. Thought the first three members of the group (they had started to climb out of the gorge the entrance of the cave was in) were affected by the Frightful presence of the beast. One rolled really well, but not well enough and they all failed. Shaken, these three players stand at the top while the dragon goes down to investigate, and the other three begin a discourse with the Silver Dragon, and they are able to better his mood and for a small payment he tells them where a Blue Dragon's (The Dracolich in question) lair is. This was the real reward for surviving the fight with the succubus, but the problem character gets really, really angry. He wants to fight the Silver Dragon. Why? He never gave a reason, and when the other players tell him they won't fight a helpful creature so far above their means to fight, he goes into a hissy fit begins calling me and the group a bunch of very disgusting names. Very bad. At this point the rest of the group wasn't really warming up to the group as he was anti-group as possible, and had once been kicked out of another group, but we decided to give him another chance after explaining to him why we kicked him out. Anyways, he's making the whole session turn south for everyone, so I tell him his character, so shaken from the sight of the dragon, slips and falls down the cliff side and takes all 20d6 falling damage. Unsurprisingly, he survives, but fails his death from massive damage roll. Then, I asked the table who wanted to raise him, and no one responded. So I told him that his second, and last chance, was used up. He was free to stay and watch but he was not allowed to create another character (I was the one that had convinced the group to allow him back, so I was very angry at this time). He turned real mature real quick, and opted to stay. The rest of the night went by without a hitch, and now (four months later) the group is considering giving him another chance, though whether it will go through is another thing all together. To the rest, thank you very much for your responses. We play my game on Friday, so I still have a few more days to make my decision. I'll take all responses to heart. It's a little heavy-handed for my taste, but it's your game. I'm not going to tell you you're a bad DM and a horrible person for it. It seems like this player is really making your game hell. If I were in this situation, I'd boot him from the group. Tell him he's a disruptive player and that the group has decided they don't want him playing D&D with them. He'll probably blow a gasket and stomp off in a huff, but your game will be saved and you'll still be having fun. If you really want to keep him around (and that's your choice), in game sanctions are your best bet.
Ayra 09-24-07, 09:42 AM	In my group we'd fix this problem easily. Every player understands that finding treasure is not a personal advancement, but a party advancement. Each player is allowed to get a little bit of spare change to spend on stuff they'd like such as potions, scrolls and other things that they'd prefer for themselves but don't offer a significant party benefit. The rest of the money goes in the party bowl. The party bowl solely exists to buy expensive stuff the whole party benefits from. This can range from a new sword for the fighter, up to a resurrection or a staff for the wizard. The game is not to be played as a single player game, which many people mistakenly believe. If the party works together well enough, they can equip each other sufficiently rather than just themselves, making for a much better functioning party altogether instead of just one buffed character. That being said: If the whole party is overpowered, it's much easier to fix than just one character. You can throw your sundering golems on the whole party without one character screaming abuse. This case wouldn't even mean the party is overpowered, because the loot would be shared with the lesser fortunate players who can't be there so often. So if you manage to make the concept of teamplay clear to your players so that it's set on material level, it's much more fun to play and destroying what a character has won't be needed. Last but not least I also want to put emphasis on the fact that destroying what a player has worked for or wants is not going to be fun for him. Losing gear and getting new gear is a part of the game, but singling one player out or destroying too much of his valuable gear will simply put him off. In this case he got too strong because he picked up too much money, but what if he figures out an ingenious combination of nice magical items that make him a tad overpowered? The player will basically lose his will to collect new items, because he will know that once he is as strong as he wants to be, the DM can (and will) very easily take it away regardless. Either you use sundering opponents a tad more frequently to make the economy a bit more active, or you leave it out as a whole and figure out a different way. I like the way of choice, where a player must choose to sacrifice (parts of) his gear to finish a questline.
servetus 09-24-07, 11:59 AM	The problem isn't that one player has a lot of loot; that's a symptom of the problem, as I see it. The problem is that you have a game mechanic that assumes relatively even playing time, and a situation that doesn't support that assumption. Even if you broke this guy's toys once, you'll just have to do it again. Plus he must be getting a huge xp advantage over the others. What I suggest is that you break the link between playing time and xps/treasure. Say to everyone, look, is the point to have a shared gaming experience, or is the point to compete with one another? [In the unlikely event that you guys decide you do want to compete with one another, then you can borrow analogies from golf handicaps, but I really hope you're not in that boat!] I suggest that you keep track of the average xps earned in any given session, and award those xps even to the characters of players who didn't show up. And I heartily second the proposal above that loot always be evenly divided, again, and I again would include the characters of players who didn't show up. Maybe you can decide on some small benefit to accrue to characters whose players are able to play more often, but frankly, the player already gets the advantage of getting to play more. And here you can easily point to the fact that people not showing up have a darn good reason they can't make it. (You could, I suppose, award the xps and treasure shares only to players who miss the game because they have to work then, or whatever else seems reasonable to you guys.)
ObliterateHerald 09-24-07, 12:09 PM	Have a powerful wizard Wish he didnt have it anymore. Case closed.
Mock26 09-24-07, 01:28 PM	Have you been reading his posts? The OP has talked to this guy repeatedly. The player acknowledged the issue and stated he doesn't care. The only options I see are in game consequences, like sunder and Modenkainen's Disjunction, or out of game consequences like "You can't game with us any more, jerk!" Personally, if I had talked to the player and he just turned out to be a complete a-hole, I'd boot him. It doesn't sound like you have too limited of a player pool to choose from. Booting a player is a legitimate reaction to such a player. But, even with the worst player I still feel that killing the character is one of the most immature responses that a DM can resort to. I, too, would have given him the boot. But I would NOT have killed the character.
Tarlin_Truesight 09-25-07, 01:24 AM	give him one of those cursed items that doubles the chance for a random encounter and makes all of the monsters prefer him as a target.
Varia 09-25-07, 02:00 AM	Usually when I read titles like "Am I going to far?" I automatically think: Yes... If thats the case it's ok to uh...challenge? the character...but I wouldnt break it. I'd have it stolen and then quested for. That way he can get it back when everyone else is ready. Or break it, but make it reperable (as I believe it would be even if you broke it.) Broken items are inherently repairable as per the RAW, it "just" costs half the original cost of the item to do it. But thats cheaper than making a new one.
Jexil 09-25-07, 03:28 PM	What I'm wondering is, why did the rest of the party allow one PC to confiscate all the dead character's loot, and why did they let him cash in on a reward they all worked for? The disparity here seems to be at least partly the fault of the other party members for allowing one of their own to take more than his fair share of the profits.
MrCustomer 09-26-07, 01:04 PM	These weapons aren't special ones that he won, they're swords that he bought with his ill-begotten gains. One is a +3 Keen Flaming scimitar, and the other a +3 Keen Frost Scimitar, (He also has a multitude of other items, ring of prot+5, cloak of res +5, to name but a few). He bought them very far apart from each other so I didn't catch it at the time, and he bought all the items so slowly over a 6 week period that I never really realized what was going on, and worse yet I didn't find out about him getting the 40k from the other character until about 2 weeks ago. The largest reason for items getting into the game that are overpowered like this is the DM allowing said items to be purchased out of hand. Now you don't need to approve of every purchase, but you should be able to control what players can or cannot purchase by laying out the availability of said items. There are a couple of ways to do this. One is using the city rules for determining the wealth of the city. Each city should have a total GP value of it's entire economy as well as a maximum GP value of any items purchaced in the city, anything more expensive then this simply is not available at the city. If say your city had a 30,000 gp limit on any available items, then a Ring of Protection +5 would not be available in the city. Nor would a +3 keen Frost Scimitar I imagine. (bear with me if I am wrong but I don't have the books with me) No matter how much money you have, these items just aren't there, even Bill Gates can't buy the Monalisa at a corner gas station. This alone keeps available items in check. You can also restrict items that are not commonly made to extra cost. While a Keen sword might be on the shelf or a Frost Sword, or a ring of protection, or +3 Sword, a +3 Keen Frost Scimitar is a very specifically customized sword. One that will take extra time and effort to make, customized jobs should cost extra or take longer as arrangements are made from the crafter's schedual and previous commitments. Furthermore you can place a set limit on the power of items, a limit of +3 on any enhancement bonus for example, this includes weapons and armors, rings of protection etc. The Sword he purchased had a +5 bonus (+3, Keen, Frost) so he wouldn't have been able to do that. A further option is to make a limit on Caster level, items require casters of high enough level and with the right spells to make. If the highest caster level in the city is 5, then an item that needs a 7th level caster to make cannot be commisioned in the city. Using any combination of these, GP value, Enhancement bonus and caster level, as a limit on available items will prevent most cases of overpowered gear from slipping into he game via the players. As for players that are missing because they have a good reason, I reward XP and spit treasure with them. I only deny Xp to players who are frequently missing for lousy reasons. Really though holding back other players from advancing harms the rest of the party and is punishing those who attend regularly as a result. It's better to advance them albeit they don't get some rewards like RP rewards, reputation etc. Your players have good reasons to miss the game and should be given a proper share of the XP and treasure as this is towards the enjoyment of the entire party. It's best to take him aside and talk to him about it and try to come to a solution with him to fix your current problem, tell him you are forced to do something about it but would prefer it if he could come up with an acceptable solution that works for everyone including him. If he doesn't then solve the problem in game or boot him depending on how much of a problem it is. In the future though prevent this from being a problem by laying out rules as mentioned above that limit purchased items and split the rewards more evenly. When a situation occurs where the players start fighting, like you described where he started acting out about fighting the silver dragon, It's best to call a 5 minute break, take the player in question aside and have a quick talk to him about it, he either agrees and you can get back to gaming, or he disagrees and you ask him to leave.