So far, we only have evidence that one person in the group has any sort of issues at all with the player, and we don't actually have an indication that it's an actual problem for anyone else in the party. Also, we have yet to receive clarification as to what the player's behavior actually is beyond trying to use a cantrip in a way that's not allowed.
It is actually the opposite. All "we" not "I" in the OP.
The original post from this thread.
"Hello there,
As the title say, we are dealing with a girl who is playing with us (roll20) as a rogue (drow). The problem is that she-clearly-has not read her class, she just keep doing basic stuff as attacking enemies on first line. Every time in combat she casts dancing lights, darkness or Faerie Fire (which became a meme for the party), after 10 sessions she still thinks that dancing lights can blind an enemy.
We even have another rogue in the party that she could mirror and learn from but it seems that she doesn't.
We have made multiple comments on it, but she still doesn't get that she needs to start playing as a rogue but still plays it poorly. How do you deal with this type of player?"
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
So far, we only have evidence that one person in the group has any sort of issues at all with the player, and we don't actually have an indication that it's an actual problem for anyone else in the party. Also, we have yet to receive clarification as to what the player's behavior actually is beyond trying to use a cantrip in a way that's not allowed.
It is actually the opposite. All "we" not "I" in the OP.
The original post from this thread.
"Hello there,
As the title say, we are dealing with a girl who is playing with us (roll20) as a rogue (drow). The problem is that she-clearly-has not read her class, she just keep doing basic stuff as attacking enemies on first line. Every time in combat she casts dancing lights, darkness or Faerie Fire (which became a meme for the party), after 10 sessions she still thinks that dancing lights can blind an enemy.
We even have another rogue in the party that she could mirror and learn from but it seems that she doesn't.
We have made multiple comments on it, but she still doesn't get that she needs to start playing as a rogue but still plays it poorly. How do you deal with this type of player?"
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full. Cherry picking does nothing but allow you to make the outcome what you want which turns it into a hypothetical solution to a hypothetical problem.
The OP did make a follow up post
"We understand the point of playing the "way you like", it is just that it is ruining the game experience for the rest of us. I understand you wanna make it your style but not reading your class makes it bad for us who are trying to make it through.
I respect the choices you wanna make, the way you engage with the environment and your class. But at least READ it."
Again "we" , then they state "I understand you wanna make it your style......"
Showing the separate views of theirs versus the group.
So far, we only have evidence that one person in the group has any sort of issues at all with the player, and we don't actually have an indication that it's an actual problem for anyone else in the party. Also, we have yet to receive clarification as to what the player's behavior actually is beyond trying to use a cantrip in a way that's not allowed.
It is actually the opposite. All "we" not "I" in the OP.
The original post from this thread.
"Hello there,
As the title say, we are dealing with a girl who is playing with us (roll20) as a rogue (drow). The problem is that she-clearly-has not read her class, she just keep doing basic stuff as attacking enemies on first line. Every time in combat she casts dancing lights, darkness or Faerie Fire (which became a meme for the party), after 10 sessions she still thinks that dancing lights can blind an enemy.
We even have another rogue in the party that she could mirror and learn from but it seems that she doesn't.
We have made multiple comments on it, but she still doesn't get that she needs to start playing as a rogue but still plays it poorly. How do you deal with this type of player?"
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Instead of inferring the OP is lying, by dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full.
No, the only logical thing to do is realize that we have an extremely limited perspective on the situation and that rushing to judge a player based on only a few sentences worth of information is premature. No one is accusing, inferring, or insinuating that the OP is lying, just recognizing that we don't have all sides of the story.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
So far, we only have evidence that one person in the group has any sort of issues at all with the player, and we don't actually have an indication that it's an actual problem for anyone else in the party. Also, we have yet to receive clarification as to what the player's behavior actually is beyond trying to use a cantrip in a way that's not allowed.
It is actually the opposite. All "we" not "I" in the OP.
The original post from this thread.
"Hello there,
As the title say, we are dealing with a girl who is playing with us (roll20) as a rogue (drow). The problem is that she-clearly-has not read her class, she just keep doing basic stuff as attacking enemies on first line. Every time in combat she casts dancing lights, darkness or Faerie Fire (which became a meme for the party), after 10 sessions she still thinks that dancing lights can blind an enemy.
We even have another rogue in the party that she could mirror and learn from but it seems that she doesn't.
We have made multiple comments on it, but she still doesn't get that she needs to start playing as a rogue but still plays it poorly. How do you deal with this type of player?"
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Instead of inferring the OP is lying, by dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full.
No, the only logical thing to do is realize that we have an extremely limited perspective on the situation and that rushing to judge a player based on only a few sentences worth of information is premature. No one is accusing, inferring, or insinuating that the OP is lying, just recognizing that we don't have all sides of the story.
Handwave what you want, speculation is speculation.
I see no reason to dismiss anything presented without other statements from people at the table, which we don't have.
So far, we only have evidence that one person in the group has any sort of issues at all with the player, and we don't actually have an indication that it's an actual problem for anyone else in the party. Also, we have yet to receive clarification as to what the player's behavior actually is beyond trying to use a cantrip in a way that's not allowed.
It is actually the opposite. All "we" not "I" in the OP.
The original post from this thread.
"Hello there,
As the title say, we are dealing with a girl who is playing with us (roll20) as a rogue (drow). The problem is that she-clearly-has not read her class, she just keep doing basic stuff as attacking enemies on first line. Every time in combat she casts dancing lights, darkness or Faerie Fire (which became a meme for the party), after 10 sessions she still thinks that dancing lights can blind an enemy.
We even have another rogue in the party that she could mirror and learn from but it seems that she doesn't.
We have made multiple comments on it, but she still doesn't get that she needs to start playing as a rogue but still plays it poorly. How do you deal with this type of player?"
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Instead of inferring the OP is lying, by dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full.
No, the only logical thing to do is realize that we have an extremely limited perspective on the situation and that rushing to judge a player based on only a few sentences worth of information is premature. No one is accusing, inferring, or insinuating that the OP is lying, just recognizing that we don't have all sides of the story.
Handwave what you want, speculation is speculation.
I see no reason to dismiss anything presented without other statements from people at the table, which we don't have.
And yet based on speculation you vote to have the player eliminated from the game.
The one other perspective we need to have is the targeted player. I would really like to know what she is thinking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
And yet based on speculation you vote to have the player eliminated from the game.
The one other perspective we need to have is the targeted player. I would really like to know what she is thinking.
I speculate nothing.
Information given:
Player doesn't read class
Thinks a spell does something it doesn't after having been told often enough it became a meme for the party
Has been encouraged to learn from a player playing the same class in the game and has not changed play style
After repeated comments player has not changed one thing
The players understand playing a character the way you like to play them, but they are not enjoying the game with the way this player is playing their character
With that information, and no reason not to believe it I see no reason to continue playing with that player. I would either boot the player or leave the game.
Only more information would change that for me.
What is your solution, suffer in silence or you are a bad person?
My solution is to smile, and start asking questions like: hey do you have a backstory for your character? Are you enjoying the game? How do you like your character? oh and here is a players handbook, some dice and a mini to paint and welcome them to the group. If that doesn't get her to engage more and she just wants hangout and participate as much as she wants i will poke gentle fun at her and leave her be she is not hurting anything. I lose nothing by having a person like that at my table
My solution is to smile, and start asking questions like: hey do you have a backstory for your character? Are you enjoying the game? How do you like your character? oh and here is a players handbook, some dice and a mini to paint and welcome them to the group. If that doesn't get her to engage more and she just wants hangout and participate as much as she wants i will poke gentle fun at her and leave her be she is not hurting anything. I lose nothing by having a person like that at my table
The game is hosted on roll 20 according to the the OP and they don't say if in person or online, what if they are only virtual?
As a DM and no players complaining sure, but we have players complaining so the lone player is out.
As a player voicing my complaints to the other player and DM, I am out.
Instead of inferring the OP is lying, by dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full. Cherry picking does nothing but allow you to make the outcome what you want which turns it into a hypothetical solution to a hypothetical problem.
The OP did make a follow up post
"We understand the point of playing the "way you like", it is just that it is ruining the game experience for the rest of us. I understand you wanna make it your style but not reading your class makes it bad for us who are trying to make it through.
I respect the choices you wanna make, the way you engage with the environment and your class. But at least READ it."
Again "we" , then they state "I understand you wanna make it your style......"
Showing the separate views of theirs versus the group.
Being wrong about something does not equal lying. The OP could very well believe their conclusions in good faith.
Based on the OP, can you please explain what it is about rogues the person being complained about allegedly does not understand? The most relevant complaint, to me, would be that the person goes up front all the time. In what way is that playing in a way contrary to how the class is written?
You are correct, being wrong about something does not equal lying. Thanks for pointing that out and I have edited my post.
Based on the OP, can you please explain what it is about rogues the person being complained about allegedly does not understand?
I can not.
In what way is that playing in a way contrary to how the class is written?
No idea
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Well if it is virtual what if it is not really a girl? or if it is a girl what if it is an older woman who has just recently found D&D or what if it is in person and the girl is dating one of the guys or one of the guys wants to date the girl... talk about awkward....
Well if it is virtual what if it is not really a girl? or if it is a girl what if it is an older woman who has just recently found D&D or what if it is in person and the girl is dating one of the guys or one of the guys wants to date the girl... talk about awkward....
After reading all three of the OP's posts on DDB. I will say it sounds like an interesting table for a beginner, if it is the same table. drow
We have only the word of one person. The rest of the party has not chimed in to give their actual opinions. It doesn't matter that the OP used "we" instead of "I" because it's still only their perspective on the matter- it's impossible to know whether the other players actually agree with them or not because they're not here.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Dismissing their statement of others having the same problem why not dismiss all of it and just assume they made the whole thing up?
The only logical thing to do is accept the situation at face value or dismiss it in full. Cherry picking does nothing but allow you to make the outcome what you want which turns it into a hypothetical solution to a hypothetical problem.
The OP did make a follow up post
"We understand the point of playing the "way you like", it is just that it is ruining the game experience for the rest of us. I understand you wanna make it your style but not reading your class makes it bad for us who are trying to make it through.
I respect the choices you wanna make, the way you engage with the environment and your class. But at least READ it."
Again "we" , then they state "I understand you wanna make it your style......"
Showing the separate views of theirs versus the group.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
If you feel like i have attacked you. You have a path of recourse open to you. You can report me.
Just published a map on DriveThruRPG The Forgotten Temple
No, the only logical thing to do is realize that we have an extremely limited perspective on the situation and that rushing to judge a player based on only a few sentences worth of information is premature. No one is accusing, inferring, or insinuating that the OP is lying, just recognizing that we don't have all sides of the story.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Handwave what you want, speculation is speculation.
I see no reason to dismiss anything presented without other statements from people at the table, which we don't have.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
And yet based on speculation you vote to have the player eliminated from the game.
The one other perspective we need to have is the targeted player. I would really like to know what she is thinking.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I speculate nothing.
Information given:
Player doesn't read class
Thinks a spell does something it doesn't after having been told often enough it became a meme for the party
Has been encouraged to learn from a player playing the same class in the game and has not changed play style
After repeated comments player has not changed one thing
The players understand playing a character the way you like to play them, but they are not enjoying the game with the way this player is playing their character
With that information, and no reason not to believe it I see no reason to continue playing with that player. I would either boot the player or leave the game.
Only more information would change that for me.
What is your solution, suffer in silence or you are a bad person?
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
I was merely pointing out a fallacy. This debate is far from needing moderation.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
My solution is to smile, and start asking questions like: hey do you have a backstory for your character? Are you enjoying the game? How do you like your character? oh and here is a players handbook, some dice and a mini to paint and welcome them to the group. If that doesn't get her to engage more and she just wants hangout and participate as much as she wants i will poke gentle fun at her and leave her be she is not hurting anything. I lose nothing by having a person like that at my table
Just published a map on DriveThruRPG The Forgotten Temple
The game is hosted on roll 20 according to the the OP and they don't say if in person or online, what if they are only virtual?
As a DM and no players complaining sure, but we have players complaining so the lone player is out.
As a player voicing my complaints to the other player and DM, I am out.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
You are correct, being wrong about something does not equal lying. Thanks for pointing that out and I have edited my post.
Based on the OP, can you please explain what it is about rogues the person being complained about allegedly does not understand?
I can not.
In what way is that playing in a way contrary to how the class is written?
No idea
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Well if it is virtual what if it is not really a girl? or if it is a girl what if it is an older woman who has just recently found D&D or what if it is in person and the girl is dating one of the guys or one of the guys wants to date the girl... talk about awkward....
Just published a map on DriveThruRPG The Forgotten Temple
After reading all three of the OP's posts on DDB. I will say it sounds like an interesting table for a beginner, if it is the same table. drow
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.