Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rojar 09-20-05, 01:15 PM	So, The Last 2 sessions, my players (all 5 of em) got to a point in the game where they were finally spending a few days in a large, civilized city-type-place. Each had been on the long caravan journey there for their own personal reasons. When they arrived at the city, some of them immediately started going about the business that had brought them there. This I fully expected. One went with the party Wizard to sell the goods at the bazaar she had traveled so long to reach. Two others went and helped a deathly ill NPC chum of theirs (since game 1, last October) meet some 'friends' who had summoned him to this far off land to be healed of his affliction. This was done very cloak-and-dagger-mysterious style, for reasons that the party does not yet know. Their sick chum told them basically, "I'll try to get word to you in a week if all goes well... or else... see you around sometime." And left into a crowded marketplace to meet his destiny. Still another character went to investigate something out of his past - and to ask questions at the temple of Pelor about more recent... visions that he had been having. Again, fully expected. In fact, I counted on this, really, because it was a perfect lead-in to more plot development that I had been working on for awhile. The player went to ask questions and was told that the Historian/Cleric was out excavating an archaeological site 3 days journey out through the surrounding desert. He was told he wouldn't be back for several days. Fine. Skip to 2 nights later. The group is en route to a fancy Inn where a Wealthy NPC has invited them to a feast for saving his life a number of times on the caravan journey to the city. They're stopped in the street by the Cleric of Pelor who spoke with the player the day before. He regrets to inform the character that a messenger has returned exhausted, after traveling 2 days and all night. He found the excavation site deserted, and no signs of the historian or his digging crew (perhaps 3 dozen laborers.) At this time, he doesn't hire the party directly, but they offer to speak with him and his fellows at the temple the next morning. (hmm... apparently a feast is more important than missing people... but still... ok, next morning then.) Next morning. Two of the party most interested leave their inn (and their chums behind) and go to the temple of Pelor where they offer their services, but cannot speak for the other party members. The Clerics thank them for their offer, and ask them to bring their friends back in an hour, as they have to meet with scholars at the wizard academy, who have some sort of vested interest in the archaeological dig. OK. Sorry for the long intro, but here's where things get annoying. Immediately upon hearing that the two will be coming back to bring the other party members to the temple, One player metagames a "I'm going for a walk through the town." So, the two return, convince the others to come back with them, but Mr. walk-guy isn't there to convince. They leave a note with the barkeep for him to go to the temple of Pelor when he gets in, and then they head out. Some discussion happens, some exposition, planning, etc… Finally Mr. Walk-guy shows up at the temple after doing some window shopping. He arrives just as the other party members are agreeing to help, and they fill him in. He starts arguing that the Clerics can find other people to help. That the party should just wait around the inn for word from their Sick-NPC chum who said he'd try to get word to them within a week and that this would probably take longer. In fact, he gets more than a little rude and goes on about how he doesn't want to get involved or help... all in front of the three open-mouthed Clerics of Pelor that the group are currently in a meeting with. The one cleric who had shown reluctance to hiring outside the church and who is a bit of a hot head stands up and shouts them down, basically saying “never mind, we don't need you. Leave." So they take the argument out into the street! Finally, the party just ends up telling Mr. Walk-guy to go home to the Inn and that they will go help the historian and his men… which he does. They go back into the Temple and convince the cleric that they really DO want to help, never mind the other guy. So. After this long, long set up for you... In your game, what would you do about Walk-guy? If *none* of the party wanted to go help the excavating crew, there would be repercussions, but the game would move on just fine. One hold out is making things difficult though... I'm leaning towards just saying "thanks for playing, I'll call you when/if the game gets back to you sometime down the line." It's either that or I’d have him hanging around the gaming table, running a cut-scene game where the party is having an adventure on one side, and he's back at the inn throwing darts or something.... Or an obvious attempt to bring the party back together through Deus ex Machine or something - which I don't like to do. Sigh. I’m at a bit of a loss. Any thoughts? Thanks Rojar
Rhomphaia 09-20-05, 01:25 PM	I would basically run a game as normal, but as a sort of 'punishment' for being difficult, run the entire adventure with the party who chose to help. Have the guy just sit there watching. When/if he decides to help, he will have to make the trek alone and through dangerous conditions or he will have to sit out the rest of the adventure. Of course, if he changes his mind before the rest of the party sets out, then it will be fine, as long as that player doesn't stir up further trouble. As it is right now, this guy is not being a team player and from the sound of it, just wants to be difficult and tack excuses onto why he is being difficult. Sometimes you need to show people like this that being a team player is what makes a group work and that standing alone is a good way to not have a whole lot of fun. In the alternative, you could always talk to the player and tell him your views and give him a chance to explain. If he is still difficult or becomes hostile, ask him not to come back. In any event, I would NOT run a cut scene adventure with this guy. He is probably looking for a reason to seem more important than everyone else and in doing so, is detracting from everyone else's fun. If you run a cut scene adventure, this is just showing him that he can go off and do his own thing and not suffer any sort of repurcussions.
UndeadMouse 09-20-05, 01:29 PM	go with the cutscene. when I first started my last campaign, I had a player who, after receiving a whole lot of gold which he used to buy a house, was content to sit around drinking gin. thankfully, he left the party very soon after, so I didn't have to make him roleplay his alchohol problem. if a player has no intrest in a adventure, there is no reason for him to have to play in it. Though on a personal note, nice job with the plot-weaving. :cool:
crossbow 09-20-05, 01:37 PM	First, talk to the guy an explain to him that the other characters want to do this adventure and that this is a game about teamwork. Try and get him back on the team. That’s the best thing for everyone. Failing that, run the adventure you have planned for the characters that want to go on it. No cut scenes back at the town, no personal adventures, just boredom sitting at the inn for this character. Like you said, if everyone wants to avoid the job and stay in town, that’s fine. You can work with that. If only one person wants to stay in town, well, he gets his wish. Move on with the adventure at hand and let him sit on his hands. When you don’t play with the team, you’re a bench warmer. crossbow
Va'el 09-20-05, 01:42 PM	As Romphalia noted, I don't understand why he would be so adamant about not going on the mission with the other party members. Wouldn't that be important to know before making a decision about how to handle his presence or absence? It would make a difference, IMO, if this were an in-character motivation (some strong attachment to the sick NPC, for example), in which case you might be able to work with the player around getting him involved in the current storyline. If it's an OOC thing, then that would be more troublesome. It seems possible that it's some combination of IC v. OOC issue... Anyways, from your superb description of the game story and the resulting events, it sounds like there were some hard feelings on both sides about the way the situation was handled in-game. It could be helpful to address those feelings as well.
gleep 09-20-05, 01:43 PM	In your game, what would you do about Walk-guy? If *none* of the party wanted to go help the excavating crew, there would be repercussions, but the game would move on just fine. One hold out is making things difficult though... I'm leaning towards just saying "thanks for playing, I'll call you when/if the game gets back to you sometime down the line." It's either that or I’d have him hanging around the gaming table, running a cut-scene game where the party is having an adventure on one side, and he's back at the inn throwing darts or something.... Or an obvious attempt to bring the party back together through Deus ex Machine or something - which I don't like to do. Sigh. I’m at a bit of a loss. Any thoughts? I would basically run a game as normal, but as a sort of 'punishment' for being difficult, run the entire adventure with the party who chose to help. Have the guy just sit there watching. When/if he decides to help, he will have to make the trek alone and through dangerous conditions or he will have to sit out the rest of the adventure. It's not a matter of punishment, but a matter of expediency. There's only so much time to run an adventure in a session and if one player is going to make it extraordinarily difficult to do so then it's his own fault. I'd tell him he can either stop being such a twit and find a way to get his character back with the party, generate a new character (at one level lower since he is, essentially voluntarily switching), or leave the game (though he'd be welcome to return at a later date... unless he demonstrates a reason otherwise). The problem with his PC wandering off on his own is that keeping one player entertained at the risk of boring the rest of the table is a no-no. Note, though, that from the sounds of it the player has some difficulty with the adventure you are introducing. It would be a good idea to find out why, he may feel that he has a legitimate reason for his actions. He may, for example, feel that the player that originally came into contact with the clerics of pelor is being unfairly favored (an adventure arc that he feels is important seems to be abandoned in favor of this other one). Check it out. While I disagree with his method of informing the table he has a problem, that doesn't make resolving the problem any less important. --gleep
Murrdox 09-20-05, 01:53 PM	If your one player is being THAT bull-headed and doesn't want to be a part of the quest... then I say let him. Run the quest as per normal with the other characters, and let him sit there not doing anything. If he decides he wants to "join in" then he'll have to find the party and trek there on his own, and possibly deal with an encounter all by himself.
NiQil 09-20-05, 03:19 PM	I had a similar situation happen in a game I play in. I was playing a lawful neutral monk who had some very strict ideas on how people should behave. The rest of the party...every single one of them...were all chaotic good. The two in question in this incident were a half-orc fighter and a dwarven wizard (don't ask) who started out hating each other, but, under orders from the tiefling rogue, were down in the bar getting fu-schnickered. My monk had already expressed extreme displeasure at this, even going so far as to try and pay the barkeep to not serve them. But they got their way...got drunk and had a barfight with each other. My monk, wanting no part of this, went to a local monastary and basically sat out the rest of the evening being pious and praying. My DM, not having planned for such a scenerio, really had nothing for me to do for the rest of that evening's game (for which I do not fault her...just a poor turn of events), so I basically sat there. I don't blame anyone....was just a situation that came up that made my character totally incompatible with the rest of the group. So at the end of the session, so as not to get left out, my DM gave me the option of rolling in a new character to go along with the group and turning my monk over to her to make an NPC...which I accepted. I would say maybe this would be a good solution for your situation. Find out why the guy is refusing to participate. Is it solely because he is trying to stay in character, or is it something out of game causing it? If out of game, this won't work....but if it is just a matter of him trying to preserve the integrity of his character, give him the option of letting his current character stay at the end and rolling in a new character that the other players higher to fill in a hole in their group. Then, once the adventure is done, he can either continue with the new one or work the old one back in.
wonlee76 09-20-05, 06:26 PM	Well, another option to do is let the "walk out" guy play the baddies in any fights that the group gets involved in the excavation. Just to keep him involved. No side adventures for his PC. No XP for his PC other then maybe some nominal 100 xp for helping out with running the fights. If he's willing to do this and stick with his PC's "choice" to be difficult, so be it. He just falls behind the rest of the group in the xp and treasure department.
FriendoftheDork 09-20-05, 06:39 PM	as noted, don't do any solo stuff with this guy. Make sure you put all your attention on the other players. If he does nothing ask him if he want to make a character that wants to help his party. If not, tell him he doesen't have to come anymore, just sitting there would just bore him.
Phrennzy 09-20-05, 07:21 PM	The problem with punishing him by not doing cut scenes is that he will get bored and become disruptive. Or he will interject advice to a party he is not in at the moment. You could just tell him that he should skip a night as the rest of them adventure. You could also send emails to him to role play the return of this NPC, if the NPC is returning. I would not set up some little side encounter - that is almost like a reward. I'd have him run out of town for refusing to help the town's church.
da beast 09-20-05, 08:12 PM	If he's doing it for strictly IC reasons then he deserves a reward! He knew that to if he didn't go he would not get an xp reward or any loot but stayed behined to wait for his sick freinds letter. What he did made your life hard but you need to be ready to anything :) I'd say let him sit at the table and occasionaly cut from the "action" at peak moments (What?! The head archialigist was actually a level 2 adept dedicated to dark gods!) to see him discover something interesting in the city (Arr ther be rumors of terribal things under the city.) If you can't handle 2 adventures at once just make his a sort of sub-story without any real combat but (If he's the kinda' guy that likes funny stuff occasionaly) maybe a comical adventure in the cities sewers with plenty of misunderstandings (OMG! THERE'S A MAN IN THE TOILET!!!!) and a small treasure at the end. It can be used to highten suspense as well (as I said earlier you can cut away) and maybe at the end you could twine their stories together.
Lord Gwydion 09-20-05, 08:41 PM	Well, one of the dangers of weaving a complex plot is that the players might decide their characters have different priorities about which thread to follow than each other, or the DM. As others have suggested, I'd recommend talking to the player out of game and find out why he doesn't want to do the adventure for the church. If he gives legitimate in-character reasons (and feeling that his ties to the friend who mysteriously disappeared to be "healed" are stronger than ties to a church to which he doesn't belong is legitimate), then work with him in some way. Maybe the character sits this quest out, waiting for word from the sick friend, and provides the hook for the next section of the adventure, and gets some XP award for roleplaying to help make up for the lost XP from the adventure. On the other hand, if the player is just being a pain, then tell him that he can either decide to come along, make a temporary character for this adventure, sit quietly at the table while the others do the quest, or just skip the session(s). Don't give him any XP awards for his regular character, because he's not acting in character. Let him reap what he sows. Now, either way, you need to be prepared for this sort of thing in the future. You provided a mystery to the group (who were these guys that the friend went with?), then totally dropped this until now important element for what the player seems to consider a worthless side quest. Yes, the game is about teamwork. Yes, most players will jump on any hook you throw out, because that's the way the game works for most groups. But it's the DM's responsibility to make sure that every character would have a reason to go on any particular adventure. You apparently provided a number of reasons for the characters to travel with the caravan to this city. Now you've given them a quest with only one motivation (help the church), which this player isn't interested in doing. You know your players, and their characters. You should have given a few thoughts to why these characters, who had been doing their own thing for the past few sessions (and just by chance all of the various things they wanted to do led to this city...), then expect all of them to do the adventure you threw out just because it's the adventure you threw out for them? I'm thinking this is something you should have been anticipating. But then maybe I've got the wrong impression from your post. It's still something you should consider. How much of the blame lays with the player for being difficult for the sake of being difficult (or his character simply being his character), and how much lies with you giving the players free reign, then attempting to herd them together?
Rojar 09-21-05, 11:00 AM	Thank everyone for the great (and very quick) responses. The next game is a week from now, so I've still got time to try to work things out, or to tell him just to miss a game. I didn't have the time, and didn't figure most would want to read ALL the details that have brought them to the point in this game that they are at now... But thanks again, all for the suggestions. I will definitely agree that when problems like this arise it can be for a number of reasons. I've tried to ask myself how I could have handled the whole 'sick friend' departure thing better while still achieving the goals I wanted to with it. It had been something in the works since the beginning of the campaign, and was the primary motivation for this NPC to be on this incredibly long caravan journey with the party. However, the mystery of his departure, and the time-frame he set up for them by saying he'd try to get back to them in a week or so was done, in part, to keep this particular character (Mr. Walk-guy) in the vicinity of the City they are now it rather than heading out completely on his own now that they've arrived. I wanted to keep them together long enough for the next phase of the campaign to make itself available. I figured a week was a good amount of time. Apparently It worked TOO well. I'm still not sure that his reasons are all In character... or if they ARE in Character, that he is not exaggerating his (usually weak) connection to this particular NPC. If it turns out to be really an IC type of thing, I'll probably end up just asking him to sit out the game or two that it will take the party, and maybe try to do a little bit of e-mailing back and forth about what happens to him or what he wants to do while they are all off on their quest. Otherwise, he's been known to be a bit disruptive at the table when he's bored. Or trying to put his $.02 worth when he shouldn't be. So yeah, knowing my players and their character's motivations is definitely important to me, so frankly, I was a bit surprised at his reluctance to want to help this Cleric-Historian-local lore guy. The main reason this character is out this way is to find his lost homeland and avenge a wrong his family has suffered. I figured it might occur to him that if ANYONE is likely to know where this Valley-of-his-people is located, it would be a learned man like this guy. Heh, DMs can't *always* be right, I guess. ;) Again, thanks all for the suggestions. I was very interested in how other DMs would deal with this situation and I'm always looking at ways I can better my own game. Sincerely, Rojar
Slyde Shadowdart 09-22-05, 01:15 AM	I despise it when player does the "my character won't work with the party" nonsense. I would post the following above my DMing chair: Attention: D&D is a social game. If your character doesn't want to adventure with the other characters, then you can go home and play a video game. Thanks and good day. That's not to say that from time to time, a character won't disagree with the rest of the party, but when it turns into one of those "my character doesn't want to participate" situations and lasts more than a session, *boot*. As an aside, I've found that the players controlling this type of anti-social anti-party anti-gaming character are usually acting out their own anti-social tendencies. Call it coincidence, but again, don't wanna play? Don't show up.
FriendoftheDork 09-22-05, 05:29 AM	Rojar I would give the player one more chance to join up. Find a character hook that works for him, for example a rumor that the clerics the party are helping might know something about his lost this and that... That way maybe he want to catch up. Otherwise a letter from the sick friend might be in order, apologizing for the fact that he will not be able to see him/them for a month or so... to put the character at ease. If that doesen't help your player is just being disruptive, and tell him to come back with a character that wants to play on the team, or not at all.
Mirikon 09-22-05, 12:07 PM	So. After this long, long set up for you... In your game, what would you do about Walk-guy? If *none* of the party wanted to go help the excavating crew, there would be repercussions, but the game would move on just fine. One hold out is making things difficult though... I'm leaning towards just saying "thanks for playing, I'll call you when/if the game gets back to you sometime down the line." It's either that or I’d have him hanging around the gaming table, running a cut-scene game where the party is having an adventure on one side, and he's back at the inn throwing darts or something.... Or an obvious attempt to bring the party back together through Deus ex Machine or something - which I don't like to do. Sigh. I’m at a bit of a loss. Any thoughts? Thanks Rojar You got the right idea, going with the 'I'll call you when the game gets back to you' plan. This player sounds like something of an ass. You'll be better off without him in the group. Also, keep the guy at his current XP, while the rest of the group go off leveling and such. If you really wanna be mean, toss in some nice magic items for the rest of the group.
JamesDruidDM 09-23-05, 12:50 PM	I run a few games, all alrge partys (5 to 9), and theres always a character who just doesnt want to go do something, be it there character is afraid, or stubborn or whatever, I dont get into the reasons, cause, I dont have the time and really just dont care, I tell them thats fine they can stay where ever they are, and then get back to the group and run what I had planned for them. I dont cut scene, I dont allow any signifcant purchases, I simply tell the stubborn person when a day goes by and thats about it. I think normally, PCs that do this, are meta gaming (walk about guy sure was) or just trying to be a thorn in my side, I dont think punishment is nessecary, cause just sitting by and listening to what everyone else is doing (and getting) is plenty to motivate them to get there .... together and participate. But for that player, I'd let him sit and rot in town, and dont go back to him till the party is done doing what they had to do Dont bog your game down because of one person :weep: