Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TrajanCavalous 06-07-05, 05:20 PM	Into the 3rd session of a new campaign with some players I don't regularly play with. Looks like the DM has set up a mystery for us; town under an evil influence, ghosts and other nasties about, people have been murdered and behind it all a shadowy mastermind with a nefarious scheme. Interesting and exciting stuff. My problem is with the party. I like mysteries, my character is into fighting and figuring things out (fighter/bard), so I'm really into sorting out the clues. 1 player is into this also tho he is kind of a quiet sort. The third player contributes to this sporadically and seems to more like kidding around. The fourth player is roleplaying a guy who is a low Cha, low Int buffoonish sort that has just been trying to bulldoze his way through encounters and is into doing anything that starts with 'I' instead of 'we.' The fifth guy is similar to the fourth with the added trait of habitually coming up with opposing opinions to what others are suggesting. He does it like other people breathe. The upshot is we are as characters and players nowhere near being on the same page. From an rp perspective I don't know why these characters would be together. I'm into solving the mystery and having folks work together so we can make headway and not have people consistently waiting while others actions are sorted out. The dm has cooked up an interesting setup but right now the only option I see is quitting and missing what could be a great adventure. Can anyone see a different way to handle this?
Jonnadiah 06-07-05, 05:51 PM	Your DM should really be handling the troublesome players. (There's a whole section about player/DM relations in the DMG) But if your DM won't do anything, then I suggest this: Pain in the arse player + Bastard Sword through throat whilst he sleeps + Blame it on someone else. = Problem solved
HappyDragon 06-07-05, 06:20 PM	I would wonder why your DM has put the group of you together as well. What is the reason for you to stay together? I'd try taking the 2nd, possibly the 3rd players you mentioned and trying to do what your characters are both capable AND interested in doing. Leave the others to do what they want to do. Just because you are a group does not mean you need to be attached at the hip and hold hands where ever you go. Which unfortunately leads me to ask the questions again....Why is your group together in the first place? Perhaps when that question is answered some idea of group cohesiveness would have the opprotunity to flourish. Until then, it just sounds like you are a bunch of individuals that happen to be in the same town at the same time and really needn't be bothered by what the other is doing.
TrajanCavalous 06-07-05, 06:42 PM	As per the dm's setup, we are all natural werewolves, either CG, N, or CN and are a 'pack.' heh It's a cool setup but I don't think we're feeling pack'ish. I have thought about just gacking some of them, for sure. Gutting it out, sticking with the folks who are into doing what I particularly want to do could work but then there's that down time for people when we are separate over and over. I've said a few things to the dm but I guess a serious conversation is called for.
HappyDragon 06-07-05, 07:15 PM	Werewolves eh?......Sure it's not your own group going around mysteriously murdering people :) Seriously though. If the set up was originally a pack mentality than use that. Talk it over with the other players, both in and out of game, and set up the pack. Can't quite go the complete alpha male leader and his alpha female mate....but extrapolate from that. Make someone the alpha, (leader) and then maybe some type of beta character, an Advisor stereotype would be my suggestion. Each individual in a pack also knows it's place. Again, talk to the players and work out what everybody's best niches in the group could be. Hopefully from all that some good group dynamics can begin to occur. As for the problem with down time, it's bound to happen occassionaly. Taking the character with low INT and CHA out and about the town while investigating in subtler social settings would in general, not be a good idea. Likewise when there is a nasty combat going on, stay out of the smashing characters way, help out if you can, sure, but if straight combat is not your thing, stay out of it. These are both extreme examples and I use them to only illustrate the point of using the group to best efficiency. Each one of you can make good back-ups for the other. It will make things a bit mmore difficult if you're not familiar with playing with people in your group, but hopefully over the course of a couple of sessions the kinks can get worked out. Everybody having a healthy respect for what the person next to them is capable of will go along way in making your "Pack" a force to be reckoned with.
Sinaz 06-07-05, 07:21 PM	This is one of those things I've never understood. All of the D&D games I've played, the players are put together, and we all just naturally want to play... together. I've encountered a few problem players, and it resolves quickly when the conversation goes like this: PC1:pbbbtt: I want to go climb down the well to get the masterwork sword that fell into it. DM:embarrass: That's going to take some time. PC2:( Leave it, you've already got a masterwork sword, and the orcs are getting away! PC1:pbbbtt: I don't care! I want to get the MAsterwor-- PC2:mad: I CARE! (OoC)We've been chasing these orcs for like four sessions and we can finally catch them, PLEASE leave the damn sword and help us capture the orcs! PC1 :rolleyes: ok ok... geeze touchy... sorry. I mean, our players GET that we want to follow the story. We WANT to work together, if for no other reason than four swords are better than one. We never contrive roleplaying incidents that are aimed to seperate our characters or create unresolvable tension between us. If our characters don't like or don't trust each other, we roleplay it within reason and try to remember that our characters are reasonable adults. In our last adventure, I played an elvish emmisary that encountered a half-elf, who's good half came from a evlish nation that my character wasn't too thrilled with. She played her half-elf with little prejudice, and I played mine with a lot at first. But I kept ending up in situations where I had the oppurtunity to help her out of a jam. Instead of being completely one sided and refusing help when oppurtunity arrose, I role played my rather snobbish elf more along the lines of his alignment and better judgement, and had him beginning to bond with the half-elf and change his close-minded ways. OMG! I can't beleive it! Roleplaying some character development?!?! Roleplaying to keep the group dynamic alive?!?!? UNHEARD OF! Really now... if I EVER encounter one of these players, I just can't fathom that taking them aside and saying, "hey, look at it from everyone else's perspective... yes you are exercising your roleplaying freedoms, but no one else is having fun. I gauruntee you everyone will have fun if you just lighten your character up and role play him WITH the group dynamic instead of always against." I mean am I crazy? Am I just naive because I've never encountered players of such little imagination? It just seems to me like, if I go to play basketball with friends, I'm not going to have any fun and neither is anyone else if I keep deciding to punt the basketball down the hill.
Shaken, not Stunned 06-07-05, 07:58 PM	Player conflict is good in moderation. If properly role-played, you should have to discuss everything and decide what to do as a group, not have one guy say "We do <this>." If it is a good game, and people are making an effort to stay in charaacter, it should work out. If you feel the problem is persisting after a few sessions, talk to your DM.
Siduakal 06-08-05, 10:09 AM	Okay, I play in a 2 man campaign primarily. (Well 1 man, 1 woman..) And I don't personally have many problems. A large part of it is, OOC I WANT us to play together so I work my character toward that IC gradually. It's accepted that no one changes overnight. And if I come up with a bit of a bastardly concept, it's accepted it'll take some time for him to change. For instance, currently she is an honorable fighter. Very hard up about her honor.. ..I'm a CN (With Evil tendencies) Drow Wizard. The first problem arose when I told a Goblin to do something and he messed it up, so I killed him. That wasn't honorable. Then a rival mercenary attacked us and I disabled him with a well placed web on his mounts wings and then I wanted to torture him.. My drow likes her, because unlike drow women she's actually NICE to him(Most the time). So he's trying to be a little better for her. But I'm not instantly making him do all good things. He still likes to cause drama, because it amuses him greatly to watch the chaos afterwards. My point is this. Characters are NOT the problem. It's the players. No matter what, some of your personality will bleed through. Whether it's your morales, what upsets you, your temper, whatever.. SOMETHING is going to go through. In their case, it's not something pleasant. They need to be sat down and talked to about it.You need to make sure to make your DM very aware of this problem.
TrajanCavalous 06-08-05, 03:59 PM	I'm frequently impressed by the quality of advice on these boards and this thread is no exception. Some good points here. I have learned from others that for a couple of these folks this is indeed not new behaviour which suggests that yeah, characters are not the problem. We do not have an idea of what each others strengths and abilities are so some organization might help. heh heh The bit about punting the basketball down the hill is perfect.
Siduakal 06-08-05, 05:06 PM	Oh also.. It's important to let SOMEONE be alpha. In my two man, I let the female player. Why? She's a fighter-sort.. I'm a wizard.. I don't want to be on the front lines, which is where a leader usually is. =P In our larger group, it was kinda 50/50 between my monk and the ranger.
Bruunwald 06-08-05, 07:25 PM	Into the 3rd session of a new campaign with some players I don't regularly play with. Looks like the DM has set up a mystery for us; town under an evil influence, ghosts and other nasties about, people have been murdered and behind it all a shadowy mastermind with a nefarious scheme. Interesting and exciting stuff. My problem is with the party. I like mysteries, my character is into fighting and figuring things out (fighter/bard), so I'm really into sorting out the clues. 1 player is into this also tho he is kind of a quiet sort. The third player contributes to this sporadically and seems to more like kidding around. The fourth player is roleplaying a guy who is a low Cha, low Int buffoonish sort that has just been trying to bulldoze his way through encounters and is into doing anything that starts with 'I' instead of 'we.' The fifth guy is similar to the fourth with the added trait of habitually coming up with opposing opinions to what others are suggesting. He does it like other people breathe. The upshot is we are as characters and players nowhere near being on the same page. From an rp perspective I don't know why these characters would be together. I'm into solving the mystery and having folks work together so we can make headway and not have people consistently waiting while others actions are sorted out. The dm has cooked up an interesting setup but right now the only option I see is quitting and missing what could be a great adventure. Can anyone see a different way to handle this? Lead! Lead! Lead by example. Keep strict notes on what you learn of the mystery so the buffoons won't distract you. Delegate some assignments to the quiet guy who looks like he's on your side. Get him involved. Ignore the idiots and don't help them when they get into trouble. Or slip the DM a note saying that you are notifying the authorities about their behavior. The kidding guy is dealable. There's always one guy providing levity. You could probably live with that. See if you can him involved by sending him to check out some clue or other. When the idiots see how badly you are shaming them by your actions, they will either shape up or cry like babies and leave.