So, a couple of buddies and I are about to start a campaign. Good stuff. The problem is that the group consists of five players, including me, and the DM. Edit: Whoa. That's not the problem. Some of the players are.
P1: He doesn't roleplay very well, but he doesn't powergame, either. He tries to optimize, but he's not that good at it. Basically a bland player. He's playing a rogue. Edit: Not a problem.
P2: He doesn't know how to play (but he thinks he does), can't roleplay, and takes D&D as a joke. Basically an eating distraction. I don't know why he's in the group. He's trying to play a sorcerer. Edit: Chaotic Stupid defined.
P3: He is absolutly incapable of roleplaying, ecxept for "I want to kill things and grow levels and get artifacts at level 3". Is utterly focused on damage output, but is really bad at powergaming, too. He's playing an archer-type fighter. Just to give y'all another perspective on him, here's a recent quote about his character: "Well, I told [the DM] I'm playing a fighter so he'll think I'll do melee, and I plan on surprising him by playing an Order of the Bow Initiate." Sorry, this isn't a competition. Edit: is in love with Chaotic Nightmare, if helps define his personality at all.
P4: He's new, and has a tendancy to want to optimize, but he has promise. He doesn't have a full grasp of the rules yet, nor is he good at roleplaying, but I'm working on it. I think he's going with a cleric. Edit: Not a problem.
Me: Not to brag, but I'm pretty good at roleplaying, very good at powergaming/optimizing, and have a great grasp of not only the rules of D&D, but the general spirit of the game. Edit: this isn't to discredit anyone else, but rather to show the difference between players.
DM: Edit: ignore the DM. He's not the focus here.
So, here are my questions:
1) Is this group doomed because of players 3 and 4? Should I just give up on pretending this is going to be a good game, and just play a random character and socialize?
2) If it's not too doomed, should I go with an in-depth, role-play-ish character and try to salvage what I can out of the role-playing encounters? The DM said it's going to be primarily combat-focused, but some role-play, too. The problem is when I'm the only one in the group trying to role-play.
3) Or should I go with the sick wizard build I made, and just treat this like a table-top strategy game? Obviously, it'll have a personality and backstory and such, but it won't be the most interesting character possible, nor will it be the character I'd like to role-play.
Note: this may sound like a rant, and I guess it sort of is, but that's not the purpose. I'm just curious on what y'all would do here, and what I should do. Also, I'm not leaving the group, because it's the only one I can find, and at the very worst everyone will get diestracted and the session will turn into a ping-pong tourney, which, although not preferable, isn't that bad.
Any other comments are welcome, too.
Ummm...I think that's it.
Thanks.
#2 and #3 however...
I've had people like #2 in my games, goes like this:
DM: *Serious gaming, fighting, roleplaying*
P: *Hilarious Joke*
All: *Laughter*
DM: *Back to gaming*
P: *Joke continuation/making fun of NPC/whatever*
DM: *Sigh, back to game*
P: *Joke on his turn*
DM: "Seriously, can we game here with less joking around? Please? Sheesh."
P: "Hey, lighten up, it's just a game."
I really hate the phrase "it's just a game". Sure it is, but that doesn't make it unimportant. If I said that to a Man-U fan, I'd probably get punched =P
We get together to socialise and to game. Not just to socialise and joke around while not letting anything else at all get done.
Does the DM have big problems with those two?
Perhaps you could take over DMing and 'show them how it's done'.
1) Is this group doomed because of players 3 and 4?
No, this group is doomed because, from what I can garner from your post, you seem to feel you have very different gaming tastes and abilities than the majority of the others. I highly recommend trying to find a group that's more suited to your tastes -- it will relieve so much tension. The game is supposed to be fun, after all.
I'm just curious on what y'all would do here, and what I should do. Also, I'm not leaving the group, because it's the only one I can find,
Personally, unless they were friends out of game, I would leave. No gaming is better than bad gaming. There are always play by posts, online chats and boards, and the prospect of just converting people you already know to tabletop gaming. I know it can be difficult to find a group, but I doubt this is really the only one in the area (unless you live on a farm or something). I suggest you learn to exhibit a lot of patience and tongue-biting if you're going to stay with this group. And stay out of whatever drama will eventually arise. (It will arise, trust me.) In the end, it's probably going to be just as much effort as finding a new group.
You have a player that sees the game as a joke. That's the death knell for your game.
I agree. I'll let him go through the first session without saying anything, but if he's too much of a problem I'll talk to the DM.
If he was out, you could potentially mold the others into decent role-players.
Well, maybe 1 and 4, but 3 is absolutly hopeless. Beyond redemption and all that.
Does the DM have big problems with those two?
Well, he has problems with 3, but 2 is a good friend of his. Which makes it slightly annoying, as he's the most likely to get distracted and distract everyone else.
Perhaps you could take over DMing and 'show them how it's done'.
I've tried. It went well for P1, P4 and the current DM, but the other two either killed themselves by doing something utterly stupid, or were because of their inability to roleplay.
Personally, unless they were friends out of game, I would leave. No gaming is better than bad gaming. I suggest you learn to exhibit a lot of patience and tongue-biting if you're going to stay with this group. And stay out of whatever drama will eventually arise. (It will arise, trust me.) In the end, it's probably going to be just as much effort as finding a new group.Well, we're all friends outside of D&D, so if the campaign does disintegrate, it'll basically just be a social gathering, which isn't that bad.I know it can be difficult to find a group, but I doubt this is really the only one in the area (unless you live on a farm or something).
I've been looking for a year. All the other ones are worse (I know, right?)
Realize I am judging and pigeonholing all of these players, who are supposed to be buddies I hang out with, not microbes on my scope to be analyzed, poked and tested with the special dye.
Question as to the setup as follows:
Me: Not to brag, but I'm pretty good at roleplaying, very good at powergaming/optimizing, and have a great grasp of not only the rules of D&D, but the general spirit of the game.
Why is that guy not the DM?
P1 is not a problem.
P2 is only a problem if you want a rock solid game of Utter Seriousness in True Roleplaying(TM). If you want a game like that, lose this guy.
P3 is just a powergamer. Have him play a tank, and have at it. He'll do more than the other half of the party.
P4 is not a problem (Teach him more RP).
You - Might be the best overall role player or might be a better fit with a more RP oriented group if your self-description is true.
DM - You are complaining, or at least judging him, especially compared to yourself. If the guy is trying, he's trying. play his game, and enjoy the privilege of not having to run, or bail and run your own, if you think you can do a better job.
Good luck. Final assessment is run your own group, or seek like-minded people more suited to your style and abilities.
So don't.
Problem solved.
2) If it's not too doomed, should I go with an in-depth, role-play-ish character and try to salvage what I can out of the role-playing encounters? The DM said it's going to be primarily combat-focused, but some role-play, too. The problem is when I'm the only one in the group trying to role-play.
3) Or should I go with the sick wizard build I made, and just treat this like a table-top strategy game? Obviously, it'll have a personality and backstory and such, but it won't be the most interesting character possible, nor will it be the character I'd like to role-play.
In the end? You know the group dynamic best. You also know what you'll most enjoy in the situation. Pick what you most enjoy, blend the two above options if need be, and roll with it, enjoying the game as much as you possibly can. Because if you don't enjoy the game... why do you play it?
As for boring combat... Have you offered to help the DM with details so the combat can move more slowly? When I was in college, we had a DM who was running a game with, I bleep you not, fifteen players. One player was designated DM aide, to help with the flow of incoming "what I'm gonna dos" and to help keep track of things like player hit points and persistant effects with time limits.
Or, step up behind the screen yourself, run a couple one-off adventures, and demonstrate better technique.
Realize I am judging and pigeonholing all of these players, who are supposed to be buddies I hang out with, not microbes on my scope to be analyzed, poked and tested with the special dye.
Frankly, it sounds like you do not want to play D&D with these people.
The point is that I do want to play with them, and I am going to play with them. I realize I may seem harsh or overly demanding, but a) two of the players are really a problem (see below), and b) I'm just showing the bad side of the players, as the good side is kinda irrelevant here.
P1 is not a problem.
Agreed.
P2 is only a problem if you want a rock solid game of Utter Seriousness in True Roleplaying(TM). If you want a game like that, lose this guy.
Well, maybe I underexaggerated how bad he is. An exchange from before: "...the orc collapses on the ground, dead." "I cut off his *****"
P3 is just a powergamer. Have him play a tank, and have at it. He'll do more than the other half of the party.
He honestly wanted to play pun-pun. Enough said.
P4 is not a problem (Teach him more RP).
Agreed.
You - Might be the best overall role player or might be a better fit with a more RP oriented group if your self-description is true.
Hey now...
DM - You are complaining, or at least judging him, especially compared to yourself. If the guy is trying, he's trying. play his game, and enjoy the privilege of not having to run, or bail and run your own, if you think you can do a better job.
Well, I may have been complaining, but the point was that I'm happy with him DMing despite his (Flaws? That sounds too harsh...).
Hm... Have you offered to help the less-experienced players build their characters? Have you worked with the DM to show examples of good role-playing, or have these guys never really SEEN good role-play to get the idea of how to do it?
They've seen good roleplaying. The two problem players are either unwiling or incapable of roleplaying (which one, though, I don't know).
As for boring combat... Have you offered to help the DM with details so the combat can move more slowly?
I'm sorry, I must have not made it clear: I don't have any problems with the DM. He could be better (well, everyone can), but he's not bad.
In the end? You know the group dynamic best. You also know what you'll most enjoy in the situation. Pick what you most enjoy, blend the two above options if need be, and roll with it, enjoying the game as much as you possibly can. Because if you don't enjoy the game... why do you play it?
I've made a nice blend of the two, and I think I'm going to stick with it. The purpose of those questions was mostly to see what y'all would do in this situation. If I played an only-combat machine and got deathly bored and suicided (haven't done it yet, and hope I'll never have to) after three levels, that'd be bad, y'know? But I've spent some time thinking about my character and I think I've reached a happy medium.
---
Alright. I've thought about this for a while now, made a good character, am meeting with P1 and P4 seperately to help with character creation, and I'll probably run through some brief mini-adventures to get them ready or whatever, I've talked to the DM about checking over P3's character to catch any cheating or anything, the DM has established a small XP reward system for roleplaying and good thinking (may as well bribe them into roleplaying, I guess...), and the DM has talked to P2 about being a distraction. So I think we're good.
Thanks, everyone.
I really hate the phrase "it's just a game". Sure it is, but that doesn't make it unimportant. If I said that to a Man-U fan, I'd probably get punched =P
Yeah, in games like this it's best to point out that you actually put work into making something and if they just want to meet up for a joke, then it's not worth your time trying to run a complex game. Suggest buying 4e or risk :P
OP; I'd say player 2 is a problem but it's not unplayable as long as your DM can reel them in.
The other two are just learning, and guess what? You were "just learning" once, too. So be a good guy to them; there are too many stuck-up grognards that drive away new players away from the game by constantly complaining that "the new guy is doing it ALL WRONG!"
(And, on a similar note, I hate guys who bring their girlfriend/wife/sibling/non-gaming friend to the table, and then get huffy with them for not knowing the rules inside and out. I'd rather play alongside a table of slow-learning but earnest newbies any day of the week over a table of fatbeards with eidetic memories demanding that things be done their way.)
So sayeth Omnus.
I have a feeling you have a hard time finding players of a like mind because all you guys would do is sit around talking about how much better you are than everyone else. My serious suggestion here? Get over yourself and try to have a good time. If there are any serious problems players in the group they'll be weeded out by session 2 or 3, provided this is more than a one off night of adventuring.
As for the group dynamic it seems to me that you're the one throwing it off. The DM said it was going to be combat heavy yet you keep insisting on trying to turn it into 'rp heavy character building'. That's clearly not what the DM or other players want, at least not in this campaign. Who knows what the next one might hold? All players go through their combat heavy phases, some of us are lucky to have had that phase 20 or so years ago. I think you should learn to go with the flow a bit and calm down. Either that or start wondering if the posts you see cropping up about the 'pretentious windbag who refuses to just calm down and have a good time' are coming from a computer terminal not that far away. That's just me though.
I'd have to say the campaign is doomed to fail because you come off like an arrogant tool. To summarize your post: While I'm the living embodiment of all that is awesome, all my friends suck and they're going to TOTALLY RUIN the drama filled angst-play I was planning with my 'sickly wizard' build! People of the board please join with me so we can hurl bloody insults at those who may be playing the game just to let off some steam or have a good time!
No, and furthermore, you sound like just as much (if not more) of an arrogant tool as the OP. "How dare he to get a serious game going? This is a game, and since it is a game, it should not be taken seriously at all ever!" Just because you like to play like Retarded Animal Babies (NWS) doesn't mean everyone else should (although 4E seems to be tailor-made for your type). If you want to "let off steam" by mindless killing and cursing, go play Halo.
So, in short, I'd like to congratulate you green_yawgmoth for that completely irrelevant and meaningless post. To show my appreciation for your unflappable nearsightedness in the face of logic and reason I'd like to award you with my D-Bag of the Day award. Yay!!!
I was looking for a new game once because my current group was reluctant to RP and disliked the new 3.0 rules. After finding a game on this site that the DM based completely off the Baldur's Gate video game, and had a half-orc fighter DMPC to boot (who liked attacking other party members when they disagreed with him), my old group started to look a lot better.