| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1The_KurganJul 06, 2011 21:49:35 | I know these are quite cliche, and I once swore I would never write one of these, but here goes: In this game I have, there's a player that people seem to dislike with varying strengths, ranging from somewhat mildly to incredibly heavily. I'm the only one, it seems, who has no real problem with him. I can see the problems people have with him: He's a huge power gamer, and roll-player, and this grates with the rest of the group. Personally, this doesn't really affect me: I generally fall into my role, and I interact well with, but am usually not too contentious with my other players. But the main problem I'm having with this situation is that the player generally leaves first of all of us, after the session ends (not entirely his fault, he works early, so he needs to get home), and the rest all talk behind his back about him. We recently held a vote, without his knowledge, on whether to keep him, or to kick him out. I'm more unrested by the fact that they're doing this all behind his back. I don't think it's fair to kick him or even vote on doing so, without letting him know of the problem. I don't want to tell him, because I don't want to throw the rest of the group under the bus, just because of my own personal feelings, and I don't really know the guy so well. Also, on the topic of voting, I don't know what to do if it comes down to me, which it just might, at least temporarily. I don't want to be the reason that he's kicked out, but I also don't want to be the reason that the group is stuck with him, when I don't really care much. What do you think I should do? |
| #2sallaJul 06, 2011 21:52:11 | My advice: If the guy doesn't bother you much, just keep quiet (as you've been doing), and abstain from voting if/when they solicit your opinion. Just say 'I'm not getting involved'. Declare neutrality. Be Switzerland, with fewer clocks and less chocolate. |
| #3bronski113Jul 06, 2011 21:58:34 | I would do what Salla says and not vote, be neutral. I might go ahead and let the others know how you feel about not talking to the guy and doing that behind his back. Just tell them you don't think its fair and then excuse yourself. Go to another room or just call it a night. |
| #4trebor_rjfJul 07, 2011 3:08:49 | if the rest of the group really doesnt like him i think it's only natural for them to vote to give him the boot. you dont have to participate but i dont think it's wrong for them to do it. |
| #5thespaceinvaderJul 07, 2011 9:29:53 | Declare neutrality. Be Switzerland, with fewer clocks and less chocolate. That sounds boring :P But yeah, I'd take much the same attitude as you. There are some people that bug me at my regular game, but I wouldn't conspire with the group 5to show them the door. If they bugged me enough, maybe try to talk to them myself, but I've not got to that stage yet. I certainly wouldn't be comfortable in that situation. |
| #6KruskJul 07, 2011 9:50:41 | I'd tell the other players that I didn't think it was fair to him to have secret votes behind his back. If we have an issue we need to address it with him. From there be the swiss. Just make it clear why you are not participating, don't leave it open to "well maybe he just doesn't care either way, or is passively agreeing" |
| #7papagiorgioJul 07, 2011 10:19:26 | Is the fact he is a power gamer their only real problem with him? What does the DM think? If you could give us some examples of how his power gaming negatively effects the rest of the group it would be helpful. |
| #8RedSiegfriedJul 07, 2011 12:19:07 |
Agreed. Tell them to grow up and have the b***s to at least meet with the guy as a group, face to face and tell him what their problem with him is before they kick him out. Perhaps give him one more chance. Then if he doesn't change and they still want to take a vote on kicking him out you could at least participate in the vote knowing that you're being honest about it. To do otherwise is cowardly, and I would tell your group that - directly. Besides, maybe he'll change his ways if you all talk to him about it. If they still want to kick him out without telling him, take the responsibility and tell the guy the bad news yourself. Someone needs to do it. I won't comment on whether the group's dislike of this individual is fair or not. It may be or it may not be. I don't have the information to make that judgement. Only you can do that. But regardless, if they want to get rid of him they should face him directly and tell him. If you find it difficult to tell the group to do this ... well, man up. Assuming you're a man, of course. Otherwise woman up. Or something. Doing the right thing isn't always easy or comfortable. Not to be overly dramatic, but this is one of those time where you have to make a choice on whether you're going to do what you think is right or whether you're going to let other people make up your own mind for you and feel guilty about it. There are going to be a lot of those choices in your life and when you look back at them, what would you like to be able to say that you did? |
| #9The_KurganJul 07, 2011 13:31:13 | Is the fact he is a power gamer their only real problem with him? What does the DM think? If you could give us some examples of how his power gaming negatively effects the rest of the group it would be helpful. It's not just that he's a power gamer; He'll use his broken stat sheet (this is 4e, so while everyone else point bought, he rolled for his stats, and got a... lets just say dubious array of stats) to think he's invincible, and do... well stupid things, that are not just stupid for him to do, but put the party in danger. (For example, after the king's best soldiers got utterly massacred against a level 22 archlich, he tried to drag the rest of the party (levels 4 or 5 for the most part) into fighting it. Fortunately, we were able to stop him from doing that, which is why I never really had a problem with it, since it was easy enough to say "No, look what he did to the regiment of the King's best soldiers; we're not goint to fight him head on." Also, he frequently tries to challenge the group in "sparring matches" (basically where he just fights someone in the party to bloodied) just to prove he's better than them, but I personally find it just easier to say no to that too, so it really doesn't affect me. And there's some other minor issues, and I think at least one of the group has some OOC issues with him, in addition to IC issues. I understand why a lot of the group doesn't like his playstyle, but it's been easy enough for me to avoid the major problem areas, so I don't really see him as problematic as others in the group do. I'd tell the other players that I didn't think it was fair to him to have secret votes behind his back. If we have an issue we need to address it with him. I've tried to tell them that, but I don't have too much ability to change that, apart from telling him myself, but as I said, I don't want to feel like I'm throwing the rest of the group under the bus. If I knew him any better, or he were personally more likeable (I don't dislike him, but I don't really like him too much) I'd be more open to telling him, myself, but I just can't really justify it, apart from my personal ideal that it's wrong to do this without his knowledge. |
| #10papagiorgioJul 07, 2011 15:51:53 | Is he a newer player? He may be experimenting with the possabilities within the game. I would talk to him about the expectations of the group as far as a fellow player went. Let him know you guys are looking for more of a team dynamic. You would be the best person to brooch the subject IMHO, since you aren't that bothered by his idiosyncracies. I would also talk to the DM about some of these issues. Why was he allowed to roll stats when everyone else was using point buy? |
| #11LangrisheJul 07, 2011 16:34:57 | I can't believe your kicking Heath out of the game. It's D&D, if you're not roleplaying you're not playing! Secret meetings behind his back and voting him out of the game without his knowledge are low acts. If you have a problem at the table clear it up at the end of that session’s game. After the session speak with him about not attacking you in future otherwise call him out in game. If he's always attacking people and he's a heavy role player it's highly likely his alignment is around the chaotic evil side. This problem can be addressed in game. I don't believe he's a bad player, the problem is a bad DM. Who allows a player to use different rules to the other members of the group? Who hasn't established the table rules about in party fighting? I think you're looking at an evil aligned player whose playing their character well and everyone else is just crying over actions their characters can't relate to because their all good aligned. Does this sound about right? |
| #12sallaJul 07, 2011 20:01:24 | Langrishe does make some good points. Another possibility: Instead of having a player vote for a player ejection, call for a character vote for a character ejection from the party. If he's deliberately and foolishly endangering the party, and pointlessly attacking party members, is this really someone your characters want to hang around? |
| #13Man_in_the_Funny_HatJul 07, 2011 23:00:33 | This is all the responsibility of the DM. Firstly, it was DM error to allow him to roll stats. If all the other PC's are going to be point buy then it's not sensible to allow one PC to be randomly rolled since the only likely result would be a character too underpowered or overpowered by comparison. Second, if the PLAYERS have an issue with another player then whether the DM likes it or not, whether he realizes it or not, it is his responsiblity to deal with the issue. The players may vote all they like to make their opinions known, but it is the DM who decides who he allows to play in his game unless there was some other unusual arrangement beforehand. It should be the DM who is telling the other players that it is at best impolite to talk about people behind their backs in this way - but since nobody else is doing so YOU should do so since you are the one who recognizes what a crappy thing this is to do. If players have issue with his character, with his playing style, with him as a person, then they should be mature enough to at least ASK first if the player concerned could make adjustments. If he can't or won't THEN ask the DM to deal with it. If he still can't/won't then it's up to the DM to decide what's best for his game and tell the player, "It's now clear that our gaming styles just don't mix well so for your own sake as well as ours we should part ways, and we hope you find another group quickly that works out better for you." None of this, talk about him behind his back, take a secret ballot and then tell him essentially "get lost because we don't like you". If the DM won't step up to the plate and try to handle this with some maturity and tact then YOU must do it for him. Tell the others at the table that what they're doing is wrong and why. Tell the DM that either HE speaks with the player to tell him there's a problem, what the issues being raised about his participation in the game actually are, or YOU will, because whether anybody likes him or not HE DESERVES A BASIC LEVEL OF RESPECT that you all would expect for yourselves. |
| #14Cohen95Jul 07, 2011 23:24:25 | What Salla said. ...only more chocolate, not less. |
| #15papagiorgioJul 08, 2011 7:42:30 | This is all the responsibility of the DM. I agree with this 100%. |
| #16vampire_batJul 10, 2011 14:03:04 |
+2 apparently to what Salla said. And even more chocolate. |
| #17CCSJul 11, 2011 20:53:18 | This is all the responsibility of the DM. No, it's NOT all the DMs responsibility. Everybody sitting at that table has an equel degree of responsibility. Firstly, it was DM error to allow him to roll stats. If all the other PC's are going to be point buy then it's not sensible to allow one PC to be randomly rolled since the only likely result would be a character too underpowered or overpowered by comparison. Actually this is more of a player problem than a DM problem. Afterall, the DM can & should be adjusting things so that they remain challenging for any stat-line. It's not terribly difficult, & it is part of the job. Players on the other hand..... Many see someone with higher stats/bonuses than themselves & get jealous. This has always happened, but it seems to have gotten alot worse in recent years. As for having games where multiple methods of stat generation are allowed? I've seen many a game where this has worked out just fine. .Those that wanted to be sure of thier stats? They were allowed to use PB. .Those that didn't feel like bothering with the PB work, didn't want any risk, but just wanted to plug #s in? They used an array. .Those who wanted to risk it for a chance at really awesome stats? They chose to role. Completely content that in exchange for possible high stat glory they may well get average or less (and have to play that!).... Many successfull games have been played at our tables with all 3 of these methods in use. Oh, and thinking of rolling? Sure, some roll high, some roll low. But the most common result has been that our players wind up with something pretty comprable to PB when all is said & done. Second, if the PLAYERS have an issue with another player then whether the DM likes it or not, whether he realizes it or not, it is his responsiblity to deal with the issue. The players may vote all they like to make their opinions known, but it is the DM who decides who he allows to play in his game unless there was some other unusual arrangement beforehand. It should be the DM who is telling the other players that it is at best impolite to talk about people behind their backs in this way - but since nobody else is doing so YOU should do so since you are the one who recognizes what a crappy thing this is to do. There's a lot of bullshit there. Especially the part I've bolded. 1) The premise of the game belonging to the DM is simple flatout wrong. It's not the DMs game. No matter how much work they put into it behind the scenes. No matter how often we all use the shorthand of refferring to a game as _____s' game. The game being played belongs equelly to all those playing. 2) Those playing in a game DON'T have to suffer playing with those they don't like - no matter who's acting as DM. So if the majority decides it's time for someone to be sent packing? Guess what.... 3) It's not the DMs job to point out how talking behind someones back is bad/impolite etc. That was your parents duty. 4) If you've a problem with somebody? Be mature enough to (politely) deal with them directly about it. None of this, talk about him behind his back, take a secret ballot and then tell him essentially "get lost because we don't like you". If the DM won't step up to the plate and try to handle this with some maturity and tact then YOU must do it for him. Tell the others at the table that what they're doing is wrong and why. Tell the DM that either HE speaks with the player to tell him there's a problem, what the issues being raised about his participation in the game actually are, or YOU will, because whether anybody likes him or not HE DESERVES A BASIC LEVEL OF RESPECT that you all would expect for yourselves. Yes, this. |
| #18KruskJul 12, 2011 8:20:54 | CCS good run down. I disagree about rolling and pb in the same game. I don't allow it, but ifyou have a mature enough group I guess it could work. My group is fairly min-max heavy, and if someone got better stats that would be an issue. |
| #19LordOfWeaselsJul 12, 2011 18:40:10 | Afterall, the DM can & should be adjusting things so that they remain challenging for any stat-line. It's not terribly difficult, & it is part of the job. It is awfully hard, sometimes, to adjust encounters for a game where ONE CHARACTER outshines all the rest. One character hits 25% more often and is missed by 30% more attacks. Oh, and thinking of rolling? Sure, some roll high, some roll low. But the most common result has been that our players wind up with something pretty comprable to PB when all is said & done. Except that the *real* result, from most games where one player rolls, is either they roll and get results better than point buy (or roll again and again until they do), or they roll just once in front of everyone else, get results worse than point buy, and then suicide over and over again in-game until enough rerolls of enough new characters produces one that's better than point buy. Assuming they don't simply cheat outright the first time, of course. |
| #201red13Jul 13, 2011 22:11:54 | I think I would be a little perturbed that one character had a "lucky" roll of the dice for stats where everyone else was point buy. The DM really should have enforced that for the sake of the other players. As it seems its an additional irritating factor for player who isn't getting along with the res I don't really have much of problem with any secret vote. The rest of the party shouldn't have to put up with someone who by the original posters telling, behaves in an assinine fashion. Part of me thinks that if the player doesn't have enough respect for his fellows to act in a reasonable and non idiotic fashion then its not much of a suprise that his fellow players don't return the favour. Fellow players aren't obigated to continue playing with an inconsiderate player, nor are they obligated to ask someone to change a disruptive players character. Should they? Perhaps a mention that if you can't play a character in a more cooperative or serious fashion maybe you need to find another group. Unless its a friend who has earned more leeway or more patience, perhaps the offending player has earned the less than respectful treatment. I'm not pro or anti kicking the guy out. I would probably just not want to bother with someone who ends up being more disruptive than cooperative |