Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bjorn the Wanderer 04-17-04, 01:35 PM	I've been playing with the same group now for about 12 years or more and have developed a bit of an issue. One of our players simmply cannot get out of the trend of plying Fighters. But it is not only that. He always plays the same type of fighter to the point that I can predict every move he is going to make in the development and play of his fighter. He has tried a couple differnt classes but continues to play them as if they were fighter often resulting in their death. Ever see a mage run into combat beofre casting mage armour??? I have. I need to find some way of encouraging him to play something else as his repetitive play is bringing my enjoyment of the game down. It just destroys the atmosphere of the game when You know your tin can two handed weapon weilding fighter is going to run stright at the first thing you see destroying the tactics of the rest of the group. Any suggestions?? Thanks, Bjorn
Thorak 04-17-04, 01:45 PM	Make the next campaign be one not centered around 'whack it till it stops twitchin' combat. So if he lynches the guy who picked his pocket, it turns out the guy's also the younger son of a powerful noble, who moonlights as a thief for excitement. And his idiot fighter gets thrown in the slammer for being a raging psychopath. Or have monsters that just don't get hurt by physical whacking. Say, a critter that splits in two whenever it takes damage. And each new form can then split too. The more he whacks, the faster he dies. Unless he gets smart enough to grapple the little buggers into submission. Or just have the encounter start when the orc raiding party crests the hill 500 feet away. They start firing arrows. Everyone who's smart goes for cover. Idiot fighter becomes a pincushion, with 20-30 orcs firing constantly at him over several rounds.
Tehril 04-17-04, 01:46 PM	Design your tactics around his selfless, and suicidal, tendancy. :P But seriously? That's a hard one to tackle. The game is about having fun...and he's having fun playing that kind of character. Talke to your DM. Maybe he could switch the campaign over to a more RP/non combat situation that empahsises stealth and nuance rather than straight melee. Or, have him set up encounters where running in head first will not be a good idea...but perhaps where the death of one character will not prevent the party from winning the encounter. If his character dies enough times from doing this, then he just might rethink his tactics.
Bjorn the Wanderer 04-17-04, 01:53 PM	Originally posted by Tehril Or, have him set up encounters where running in head first will not be a good idea...but perhaps where the death of one character will not prevent the party from winning the encounter. If his character dies enough times from doing this, then he just might rethink his tactics. I wish. He continues to make the same mistake over and over again and is generally bailed out by the combination of armour and the rest of the group regrouping and dealing with the situation. There was one time where I had my Monk grapple him to the ground to prevent him from doing something stupid then he got pissy at me for it. It wasn't 15 minutes later that he went and repeated the process and I wasn't in the way to stop him. He is very stubborn about it and I have no control over the campaign development. I tried talking to him and he is not even willing to sit down with me and look over some alternatives. Thanks, Bjorn
FriendoftheDork 04-17-04, 01:53 PM	hmmm... Will save... mwuahahaha! :smirk:
CannibalPlague 04-18-04, 11:48 PM	Sounds like this guy should be playing a barbarian class rather than fighter. I do agree that your game should take more of a lean towards RP than hack-and-slash. Although it sounds like since he won't even atempt a sit down with you, perhaps you have a rogue player who is just out to sabotage your game. I say if the other players have a problem with his one sided ways, they should speak up.
KAPtain Braindead 04-20-04, 03:10 AM	Try the simple approach. Ask the rogue player to make a fighter, then tell the problem player that the other player wants to try a fighter for a while, but that would leave the party a rogue short. Would the problem player mind trying a rogue? Note: the rogue would be the best class for him to try when weening him off the fighter class. There is no worries about spell casting. Or the next time you make a new set of characters, tell them that class will be determined by die roll. There will be a bonus XP based on how well they play the character class. Since there are 11 core classes, remove the fighter from the list and roll a d10. Roll the problem player first and reroll any classes that come up twice until you get a balanced party. If the problem player complains that his favorite class isn't available, point out there are three other classes that are predominantly fighters and the monk and cleric do great in combat. All in all a 5 in 10 chance to roll a combat machine. If he still complains offer to combine the wizard & sorcerer and add the fighter. This only gives a 1 in 10 chance for a fighter. If he still complains threaten to roll his race as well. If he keeps quiet, he can choose a human character for the extra feat and bonus skills.
Sir Todd 04-20-04, 08:15 AM	Hold on there! He wants to charge into combat swinging. Trust me its fun to do from time to time and especially rewarding after a difficult day at work. The Real Problem here is not the other player its you. - He likes a simple hack and slash style of play. And he simply wants to blow off steam on whatever enemies you face. - You seem to want a battle strategy game where each move is carefully metagamed before its implemented. Why are you the problem? Because your the one getting upset over the way someone else is playing. He is having fun, let him. If you want to play with exacting battle tactics then have fun doing it. Just don't expect anyone else to HAVE to follow your directions. if your in a group of 4 and only one or two other persons want to play like you do then get together with that one or two other persons and work out some battle tactics on a smaller scale. Or do as was suggested earlier and work your tactics around what the other player likes to do. If you try to FORCE anyone else to follow your battle strategies then your the one disrupting the game.
Ainaelin 04-20-04, 11:41 AM	Originally posted by Sir Todd Hold on there! He wants to charge into combat swinging. Trust me its fun to do from time to time and especially rewarding after a difficult day at work. The Real Problem here is not the other player its you. - He likes a simple hack and slash style of play. And he simply wants to blow off steam on whatever enemies you face. - You seem to want a battle strategy game where each move is carefully metagamed before its implemented. Why are you the problem? Because your the one getting upset over the way someone else is playing. He is having fun, let him. If you want to play with exacting battle tactics then have fun doing it. Just don't expect anyone else to HAVE to follow your directions. if your in a group of 4 and only one or two other persons want to play like you do then get together with that one or two other persons and work out some battle tactics on a smaller scale. Or do as was suggested earlier and work your tactics around what the other player likes to do. If you try to FORCE anyone else to follow your battle strategies then your the one disrupting the game. Actually, the "fighter"-player disrupts the game in a way, since he prevents the other players to have fun in their cautiously-planned tactics (read first posts). So, I would say, that there is not ONE problem, but there are a few. And the source of it all is indeed style of play. It is always difficult to deal with that, especially if one is not willing to cooperate and make concessions. If that is the case, and everybody else is feeling the same way as you do, Bjorn, you might want to give him an ultimatum : try change a little (even play a fighter, but differently), or leave the group. If that is not possible, or some people in the group do not feel the way you do, than it's hard call for you. You may want to find another group, ot convince him to talk. But as Sir Todd said, it is very seldom a good idea to force someone to play a character they don't want to play.
Bjorn the Wanderer 04-20-04, 11:49 AM	His actions have been disrupting others play as well. My brother (presently playing the wizard) has a number of issues with his play as well as my fiance. It is disruptive and very unimaginative. It just takes a lot from the game. I actually got him to take a minute and talk to me on messanger and I think he may be starting to see my point. I'm thinking I might be able to encourage him to rework some of his tactics to join the group rather then disrupt it. Later, Bjorn
Lagomorph 04-20-04, 12:49 PM	is there roleplaying in your campaigns? if so, does he just always play the same type of personality or is this what he just feels like doing out of game for kicks? do you guys create character pasts and involved descriptions before you play? first of all, i cant imagine someone playing the same type of character for 12 years. i mean... i played fighters for the last 2 years but i varied their personalities, and in an upcoming campaign i will be playing a sorcerer. suggest that he try to make up an in-depth personality thats unique to this new character and stick to it. i know that some people arent all about acting out their character and just want to powergame, but playing D&D in a group is often all about compromising. otherwise, groups made up of thieves and paladins and such would never work out. i agree that getting him to play a rogue might be a good idea. its still mostly a melee class, but you often wont find a rogue who'll run headlong into open combat. get him to play a sneaky, crafty character. those are usually pretty climactic to play. but either way, if hes not willing to compromise and doesnt want to roleplay(or wants to roleplay the same thing over and over for 12 years), i dont know why you and the other people of your group keep playing with him,
Bjorn the Wanderer 04-20-04, 01:03 PM	Yes we have roleplaying in our campaign. I am presently playing a bard to make the most of it. Andour next campaign is looking to expand on the amount of roleplaying. We have developed histories for our characters for some time now and his are generally very similar, or go ignored. I'm just looking for a way to make him expand on this and try something a little different. During that 12 years he has played other characters but he has a very recongisable theme of playing that same character again and again. We don't want to dump him as he is a good guy and has been a freind of ours from sometime. We just want to see something other then a tin can fighter with a big weapon and essentially no personality. For example he spends party down time looking for better equipment and thats about it. While the rest of the party works on developing contacts, practicing non-combat based skills (Professions and crafts for example). His comments can at times be limited to "We'll go down this hall now". It just makes thins a little drab and very easy to figure out whats he is going to do. I guessed what his next character was going to be before he said it. It just takes alot away from the game. Later, Bjorn
Ainaelin 04-21-04, 04:24 AM	Well, if he's on better tracks now, we should just wait and see... :) One other thing to do, a little harsh however, especially if he's a 12-year friend, would be to sometimes play without him, and tell him about the fun you're having, playing your way (that is, if you're really having fun that way, of course. No use to lie to him... :D ) Maybe if he feels he's being dropped, he will strive for a better group dynamics... The danger of such tactics, however, is that he might feel hurt by that, and react the opposite of your wish, refusing to see any of you ever again... :(
Elrana 04-21-04, 08:54 PM	He sounds like a bit of a power player to me, particularly as you said he is always on the look out for more items. There is a simple trick - give him what he wants. If you want to stop him from charging into every battle and destroying your plans then let him find a bow that is simply so superb he can't refuse to use it and even to take feats to improve his proficiency with it. It may seem like rewarding an irritating habit but it may force him to develop his character through a different route. When you are trying to create contracts and so on while he is looking for new items make a contact who will only talk to someone he respects, someone like him, a big bad ass fighter so if you are to discover the whereabouts of the hidden tomb of the last King-Knight and liberate his famous armour and shield of invulnerability then he will have to not only do the talking, but make his character likeable and win the contract. Especially if he knows that there are two other groups vying for this particular mission. Basically box clever and play on and play into what you see as his weaknesses so he develops his roleplaying without even noticing. Without meaning to be rude it is the job of the DM to make the game enjoyable for all and to push his players. If your DM isn't up to it it is his fault, not the player's.
Ainaelin 04-22-04, 04:51 AM	Originally posted by Elrana Without meaning to be rude it is the job of the DM to make the game enjoyable for all and to push his players. If your DM isn't up to it it is his fault, not the player's. For all that I agree with the rest of your post, I have to answer this one. I think in a group-game, it is everybody's job to help the others have a good time, or at least not prevent the others from having a good time...
denomicon 04-23-04, 02:04 AM	Just a thought, are you guys n' girl playing with minatures? Kind of sounds to me like maybe not. I would suggest you give that a try, if you haven't. Even the most volatile hack n' slasher can become a tactical genius if he has a battlemat to look over. It worked for our group, the only problem is since 3.0 our combats take too long... too much strategizing can be a bad thing.
Ainaelin 04-23-04, 04:58 AM	Originally posted by denomicon too much strategizing can be a bad thing. I fully agree, and that's a reason we don't use them too much, especially since you generally do not have such a nice sight of a situation when you are standing in the midst of the battle, running around and swinging your weapons, surrounded by foes... and have to take decisions, not like "do I attack or not?", but like (at the same time!) : "his defense is good, I should attack with all my strength at the shoulder, and then drop to my knees - wait, he anticipated that, - in a flashing reflex, I parry his blow- that was close. Hey, Eggy's down, I have to help him, but this darned Orc is in the way, try to block that blow to your stomach, pig-faced monster! he BLOCKED it again! Careful, there's a log on the ground, maybe it could be useful... " OK, this was in a round, for a 1st-level character facing an Orc, and an ally fell. Both orc and PC missed their hit, and I could have added more. It's very difficult to think about not provoking attacks of opportunity in such a fight. You go straight to where you want to go, you don't have time to waste. 10 feet are 1 second wasted, and you cannot always afford that much in a real fight. So even though I think AoO, flanking and such give fights a dimension that D&D fights uttermost lacked before, I now think players place too much emphasis on tactics now, especially with miniatures... I'm trying to avoid them unless necessary, now... ;)