So, I've got a player in one of my campaigns who I feel just isn't getting it. They're brand new to D&D and though I have tried to make the game accessible there's a lot of video game type assumptions that they've made.
Now, there's no doubt that part of the issue here is me as DM failing to teach them the game as they need. That said, despite some discussion I just don't feel like they're fitting well with the group. I also am finding it quite difficult to cater to their needs. In short, it's not their fault and is a play style and personality mismatch.
I hate asking players to leave, I really hate it. That said, I feel like I do have to ask them to leave the table. I'm not the right DM for them, and they're an unbalancing force around the table because of that.
So, I guess my question is what would your advice be fellow DMs?
I should add, that despite a couple of discussions with them they are playing in a way that most players have raised eyebrows at. Their character is predominantly a melee focused build but frequently they're either attacking from range, or just going off and following whatever pops into their head. They have no teamwork ethic. They instead act as a single player in a party.
I feel awfully like I'm the one that failed them as they've never played before. It's always hard for me to ask someone to leave, but I feel like I'm left with no other choices.
I think you gave a pretty good explanation in your post. I assume you've already discussed the problems with the player, so it shouldn't be a complete surprise. I'd try and stick with what you have. And keep it short, more words won't make it sting any less.
About the only suggestion I'd have is to tell them, you think they're a good player (assuming they are) and while they don't fit with your group, they may fit better with other groups. Then maybe give some suggestions for the kinds of playstyles they should be looking for if/when they seek out a new group. (For example, "you are looking for power gamers, and we're not." Obviously, I don't know if that's the problem, it was just an arbitrary example.) Since you have the experience, and they don't, you can teach them the vocabulary to be able to find a better fit going forward.
One way to handle it would be to be very clear and upfront about what you need from your players. Behavior guidelines, table rules, etc. Have every player look it over, and they must agree to hold to it if they want to continue.
Now it's on them to say "I can't do this" and assuming that everyone else agrees, the mismatch - and the players role in it - becomes more clear. If they don't leave at that point and continue to exhibit the behavior, you can point to the table rules - the rules that everyone has agreed to - in order to shut it down.
This truly gives them a chance to stay in the game if they're willing to be the type of player you need. If not, the writing is on the wall. You may still need to have the difficult conversation, but you'll be able to show that you've tried.
As for not being a team player. Talk to him privately about it first.
Once you have spoken to him privately then its up to the rest of the party to do their part.
Quietly inform the rest of the group to encourage him to become a team player. And if he does not then its up to them if they want to share in the loot with him or keep it themselves.
Often this calms down the wayward player but if not the other players will make it a point to leave him out of a lot of the play. They go off and find another contract for pay and tell him its only half what it really is. Or the party starts to keep magic items he could use from him and gives them to someone else.
Ever see a military movie were one guy screws up badly? The sergeant always tried first to correct the screw up but eventually the sergeant punishes everyone equally until the rest of the group straightens out the guy or he quits. Your the sergeant. You have no need to punish the offending member directly.
As for not being a team player. Talk to him privately about it first.
Once you have spoken to him privately then its up to the rest of the party to do their part.
Quietly inform the rest of the group to encourage him to become a team player. And if he does not then its up to them if they want to share in the loot with him or keep it themselves.
Often this calms down the wayward player but if not the other players will make it a point to leave him out of a lot of the play. They go off and find another contract for pay and tell him its only half what it really is. Or the party starts to keep magic items he could use from him and gives them to someone else.
Ever see a military movie were one guy screws up badly? The sergeant always tried first to correct the screw up but eventually the sergeant punishes everyone equally until the rest of the group straightens out the guy or he quits. Your the sergeant. You have no need to punish the offending member directly.
So, I have already discussed this with said player.
My standard procedure is to hold check-in chats around ten sessions into a game to gain insight into any issues or niggles players have. This player's name came up in every other chat. The group of course were correct so I laid out in the check in with said player the issues other players had. I also made suggestions on what other players might expect and how we could improve.
In this particular case, it really is not that they've done anything wrong. It's more that despite discussing the nuances of D&D with the player they're still running round like the main character and expecting everything to work like a video game. They're coming to the table with very set expectations that no amount of explaining has been able to remedy.
Personally, I feel like this is on me for not introducing the game in a better way. The less charitable part of me feels like other DMs might have given up way before the 20th session (where this group is at now!).
As I say, it's no one thing that I can point to if I'm honest. That's what makes it so difficult.
The best advice I can give is (assuming you are both putting forth a good faith effort and it isn't working) is just to be honest with the player that this campaign might not be for them. If you're feeling especially generous you can try and help them find another group, but at the end of the day as a GM you need to do what is best for you, the campaign and the party and if that means you need to boot a player, well...
Personally, I feel like this is on me for not introducing the game in a better way. The less charitable part of me feels like other DMs might have given up way before the 20th session (where this group is at now!).
As I say, it's no one thing that I can point to if I'm honest. That's what makes it so difficult.
I don't know if anyone here can say who is or is not at fault. it could easily be that no one was wrong, and these things just happen sometimes, despite everyone's best efforts.
But, at some point, fault doesn't matter. The player doesn't fit, and it seems like you and the rest of the group have all realized that. Beating yourself up about it, whether justified or not, isn't going to help. Prolonging things will only make it worse for everyone. All that's left now is to do it, which is much easier for me to say from halfway around the world. It always sucks, and is probably the worst part of being a DM.
The "like a video game" trap is one that a LOT of newer players fall into. Before potentially kicking them out, I have a suggestion for another chat.
Compare D&D (and RPGs in general) not to a video game, but to improvisational theater. Make it very clear that this "game" is actually a story, and that story is dictated by the players' choices, and randomized by the dice. The game supports the story, not the other way around.
In fact, that's actually the genesis of the game. D&D was, originally, just a bunch of guys telling stories as a group. The story needed rules, otherwise the story would devolve into chaos (speaking from experience).
You may also want to give them a challenge: Next combat encounter, stay within 20 feet of the enemy at all times.
But, if their behavior doesn't improve soon, there comes a point where you just need to be perfectly frank and kindly ask them to leave.
The "like a video game" trap is one that a LOT of newer players fall into. Before potentially kicking them out, I have a suggestion for another chat.
Compare D&D (and RPGs in general) not to a video game, but to improvisational theater. Make it very clear that this "game" is actually a story, and that story is dictated by the players' choices, and randomized by the dice. The game supports the story, not the other way around.
In fact, that's actually the genesis of the game. D&D was, originally, just a bunch of guys telling stories as a group. The story needed rules, otherwise the story would devolve into chaos (speaking from experience).
You may also want to give them a challenge: Next combat encounter, stay within 20 feet of the enemy at all times.
But, if their behavior doesn't improve soon, there comes a point where you just need to be perfectly frank and kindly ask them to leave.
You know, that's a great reminder. I used to do shared storytelling as a drama exercise when teaching. You wouldn't believe how often Primary school age kids either killed off or created dragons from nowhere unless you put rules in place...
The description is a great way of putting it. Really useful.
So, I've got a player in one of my campaigns who I feel just isn't getting it. They're brand new to D&D and though I have tried to make the game accessible there's a lot of video game type assumptions that they've made.
Now, there's no doubt that part of the issue here is me as DM failing to teach them the game as they need. That said, despite some discussion I just don't feel like they're fitting well with the group. I also am finding it quite difficult to cater to their needs. In short, it's not their fault and is a play style and personality mismatch.
When the intro leads with "video game type assumptions" it's challenging to not be biased against the player-in-question. That said, if their personality doesn't fit well with the group, has no one else in the group said anything during game that this person might need to hear? I fully well understand that the DM is the primary leader of the game, but there can be room for others to speak their mind, should the need arise. If your "problem player" says or does something that goes directly against socially acceptable behavior, or party concensus, has the party not provided correction? After all, it takes a village to raise a child.
I should add, that despite a couple of discussions with them they are playing in a way that most players have raised eyebrows at. Their character is predominantly a melee focused build but frequently they're either attacking from range, or just going off and following whatever pops into their head. They have no teamwork ethic. They instead act as a single player in a party.
Teamwork runs both ways at the same time. If this player is the minority view, and follows along on the majority plan, at some point, the majority view should be expected to follow along with the minority plan. If you were the leader of a small group of individuals, and you were the only person that wanted to execute Plan A, everyone else either wanted nothing to do with any of it, or wanted Plan F, who is lacking in the teamwork department? The leader, or the subordinates? If this player is constantly being ignored by the party, or being forced to follow a path they don't like, they will appear to run off and do their own thing, if they are self-confident and strong-willed enough. Additionally, trying to get the players that "know how to play D&D right" to accept a newbie into the group, could also be a hurdle. From the sounds of it, you are in stage 2 of FSNP.
Last thing I'll suggest is that D&D isn't for everyone. Not every group is a good fit for any single person. It's ok to accept that things didn't work out. I would still advocate to listen to this player, not talk to - you want their input on what fun looks like and issues that they see in the party. If that feedback points to video gamey, main character syndrome, and the player doesn't seem willing to accept a differing point of view, then you are left with no other course than to ask them to not D&D with you anymore.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Until the party realise that they can tie up the PC and leave them to continue on their way with less unexpected consequences.
Pretty sure that suggesting PvP as a solution to player behavior is not the advice that OP was hunting for when they asked for ways to eliminate conflict and akwardness around the table. I will admit, I could be wrong on this one, but my gut instinct tells me that this is not a good fit for this situation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Here's a tool I've used in real life and in games. SBI: Situation, Behavior, Impact. It's hard to talk about things somebody did without being specific. I compare it to a dog: The dog doesn't remember what it did wrong 1 minute later. If you catch a dog doing something, you have to say, "no" immediately, then reward good behavior. I don't mean that your players are dogs, but the idea helps.
As soon as you can talk to the player alone, be it at a break or after everyone else leaves, employ SBI. Tell them the specific situation. Then, describe their behavior as you saw it (all facts, no motivation or intent). Next, say what you and others saw afterward as an impact. SBI.
There is less room for debate ("less") if it's factual and not speculation. This shows them what they caused. Only after somebody realizes what they did and what that caused can they change.
As an example, "The party was camping. They were all asleep except your Murder Thief. (Situation) Your Murder Thief crept up on the Wizard and axed him in the face. (Behavior) Now, the party is weaker, and that player is going to be busy rolling dice next week instead of playing. (Impact)"
This has to happen soon and privately after the murder for it to have impact. If the victim's player is there, then there may be some shame or anger that doesn't help. If the instigator doesn't agree with this or doesn't care, then you might have a problem that talking can't fix.
At that point, now that it's clear what the problem is, you can both move forward with a solution.
If you want, providing they play online through Discord and the player is available to play Thursdays 6pm GMT+1 each week, send them my way. I'll be happy to attempt to include them with my players. :)
I try to be as inclusive as possible and my structure might work for them... might not work too but it's the attempt that matters.
My game is based in Victorian Steampunk setting and they'll be asked to enter with a new level one character. Hope that helps!
^--------- This is probably the best post I've seen, at least today.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Until the party realise that they can tie up the PC and leave them to continue on their way with less unexpected consequences.
Pretty sure that suggesting PvP as a solution to player behavior is not the advice that OP was hunting for when they asked for ways to eliminate conflict and akwardness around the table. I will admit, I could be wrong on this one, but my gut instinct tells me that this is not a good fit for this situation.
Other than the awkwardness that would ensue, AL frowns heavily on anything considered close to PvP. :-D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I've got a player in one of my campaigns who I feel just isn't getting it. They're brand new to D&D and though I have tried to make the game accessible there's a lot of video game type assumptions that they've made.
Now, there's no doubt that part of the issue here is me as DM failing to teach them the game as they need. That said, despite some discussion I just don't feel like they're fitting well with the group. I also am finding it quite difficult to cater to their needs. In short, it's not their fault and is a play style and personality mismatch.
I hate asking players to leave, I really hate it. That said, I feel like I do have to ask them to leave the table. I'm not the right DM for them, and they're an unbalancing force around the table because of that.
So, I guess my question is what would your advice be fellow DMs?
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
I should add, that despite a couple of discussions with them they are playing in a way that most players have raised eyebrows at. Their character is predominantly a melee focused build but frequently they're either attacking from range, or just going off and following whatever pops into their head. They have no teamwork ethic. They instead act as a single player in a party.
I feel awfully like I'm the one that failed them as they've never played before. It's always hard for me to ask someone to leave, but I feel like I'm left with no other choices.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Ugh, that's awkward.
I think you gave a pretty good explanation in your post. I assume you've already discussed the problems with the player, so it shouldn't be a complete surprise. I'd try and stick with what you have. And keep it short, more words won't make it sting any less.
About the only suggestion I'd have is to tell them, you think they're a good player (assuming they are) and while they don't fit with your group, they may fit better with other groups. Then maybe give some suggestions for the kinds of playstyles they should be looking for if/when they seek out a new group. (For example, "you are looking for power gamers, and we're not." Obviously, I don't know if that's the problem, it was just an arbitrary example.) Since you have the experience, and they don't, you can teach them the vocabulary to be able to find a better fit going forward.
One way to handle it would be to be very clear and upfront about what you need from your players. Behavior guidelines, table rules, etc. Have every player look it over, and they must agree to hold to it if they want to continue.
Now it's on them to say "I can't do this" and assuming that everyone else agrees, the mismatch - and the players role in it - becomes more clear. If they don't leave at that point and continue to exhibit the behavior, you can point to the table rules - the rules that everyone has agreed to - in order to shut it down.
This truly gives them a chance to stay in the game if they're willing to be the type of player you need. If not, the writing is on the wall. You may still need to have the difficult conversation, but you'll be able to show that you've tried.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
As for not being a team player. Talk to him privately about it first.
Once you have spoken to him privately then its up to the rest of the party to do their part.
Quietly inform the rest of the group to encourage him to become a team player. And if he does not then its up to them if they want to share in the loot with him or keep it themselves.
Often this calms down the wayward player but if not the other players will make it a point to leave him out of a lot of the play. They go off and find another contract for pay and tell him its only half what it really is. Or the party starts to keep magic items he could use from him and gives them to someone else.
Ever see a military movie were one guy screws up badly? The sergeant always tried first to correct the screw up but eventually the sergeant punishes everyone equally until the rest of the group straightens out the guy or he quits. Your the sergeant. You have no need to punish the offending member directly.
So, I have already discussed this with said player.
My standard procedure is to hold check-in chats around ten sessions into a game to gain insight into any issues or niggles players have. This player's name came up in every other chat. The group of course were correct so I laid out in the check in with said player the issues other players had. I also made suggestions on what other players might expect and how we could improve.
In this particular case, it really is not that they've done anything wrong. It's more that despite discussing the nuances of D&D with the player they're still running round like the main character and expecting everything to work like a video game. They're coming to the table with very set expectations that no amount of explaining has been able to remedy.
Personally, I feel like this is on me for not introducing the game in a better way. The less charitable part of me feels like other DMs might have given up way before the 20th session (where this group is at now!).
As I say, it's no one thing that I can point to if I'm honest. That's what makes it so difficult.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
The best advice I can give is (assuming you are both putting forth a good faith effort and it isn't working) is just to be honest with the player that this campaign might not be for them. If you're feeling especially generous you can try and help them find another group, but at the end of the day as a GM you need to do what is best for you, the campaign and the party and if that means you need to boot a player, well...
I don't know if anyone here can say who is or is not at fault. it could easily be that no one was wrong, and these things just happen sometimes, despite everyone's best efforts.
But, at some point, fault doesn't matter. The player doesn't fit, and it seems like you and the rest of the group have all realized that. Beating yourself up about it, whether justified or not, isn't going to help. Prolonging things will only make it worse for everyone. All that's left now is to do it, which is much easier for me to say from halfway around the world. It always sucks, and is probably the worst part of being a DM.
The "like a video game" trap is one that a LOT of newer players fall into. Before potentially kicking them out, I have a suggestion for another chat.
Compare D&D (and RPGs in general) not to a video game, but to improvisational theater. Make it very clear that this "game" is actually a story, and that story is dictated by the players' choices, and randomized by the dice. The game supports the story, not the other way around.
In fact, that's actually the genesis of the game. D&D was, originally, just a bunch of guys telling stories as a group. The story needed rules, otherwise the story would devolve into chaos (speaking from experience).
You may also want to give them a challenge: Next combat encounter, stay within 20 feet of the enemy at all times.
But, if their behavior doesn't improve soon, there comes a point where you just need to be perfectly frank and kindly ask them to leave.
You know, that's a great reminder. I used to do shared storytelling as a drama exercise when teaching. You wouldn't believe how often Primary school age kids either killed off or created dragons from nowhere unless you put rules in place...
The description is a great way of putting it. Really useful.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
When the intro leads with "video game type assumptions" it's challenging to not be biased against the player-in-question. That said, if their personality doesn't fit well with the group, has no one else in the group said anything during game that this person might need to hear? I fully well understand that the DM is the primary leader of the game, but there can be room for others to speak their mind, should the need arise. If your "problem player" says or does something that goes directly against socially acceptable behavior, or party concensus, has the party not provided correction? After all, it takes a village to raise a child.
Teamwork runs both ways at the same time. If this player is the minority view, and follows along on the majority plan, at some point, the majority view should be expected to follow along with the minority plan. If you were the leader of a small group of individuals, and you were the only person that wanted to execute Plan A, everyone else either wanted nothing to do with any of it, or wanted Plan F, who is lacking in the teamwork department? The leader, or the subordinates? If this player is constantly being ignored by the party, or being forced to follow a path they don't like, they will appear to run off and do their own thing, if they are self-confident and strong-willed enough. Additionally, trying to get the players that "know how to play D&D right" to accept a newbie into the group, could also be a hurdle. From the sounds of it, you are in stage 2 of FSNP.
Last thing I'll suggest is that D&D isn't for everyone. Not every group is a good fit for any single person. It's ok to accept that things didn't work out. I would still advocate to listen to this player, not talk to - you want their input on what fun looks like and issues that they see in the party. If that feedback points to video gamey, main character syndrome, and the player doesn't seem willing to accept a differing point of view, then you are left with no other course than to ask them to not D&D with you anymore.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
This is a good thread.
We have a player in our group that is similar in that they tend to just go off and explore areas away from the party or without party input.
Then the party is stuck dealing with the consequences....which can be rough in CoS.
Until the party realise that they can tie up the PC and leave them to continue on their way with less unexpected consequences.
Pretty sure that suggesting PvP as a solution to player behavior is not the advice that OP was hunting for when they asked for ways to eliminate conflict and akwardness around the table. I will admit, I could be wrong on this one, but my gut instinct tells me that this is not a good fit for this situation.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Here's a tool I've used in real life and in games. SBI: Situation, Behavior, Impact. It's hard to talk about things somebody did without being specific. I compare it to a dog: The dog doesn't remember what it did wrong 1 minute later. If you catch a dog doing something, you have to say, "no" immediately, then reward good behavior. I don't mean that your players are dogs, but the idea helps.
As soon as you can talk to the player alone, be it at a break or after everyone else leaves, employ SBI. Tell them the specific situation. Then, describe their behavior as you saw it (all facts, no motivation or intent). Next, say what you and others saw afterward as an impact. SBI.
There is less room for debate ("less") if it's factual and not speculation. This shows them what they caused. Only after somebody realizes what they did and what that caused can they change.
As an example, "The party was camping. They were all asleep except your Murder Thief. (Situation) Your Murder Thief crept up on the Wizard and axed him in the face. (Behavior) Now, the party is weaker, and that player is going to be busy rolling dice next week instead of playing. (Impact)"
This has to happen soon and privately after the murder for it to have impact. If the victim's player is there, then there may be some shame or anger that doesn't help. If the instigator doesn't agree with this or doesn't care, then you might have a problem that talking can't fix.
At that point, now that it's clear what the problem is, you can both move forward with a solution.
Hi,
If you want, providing they play online through Discord and the player is available to play Thursdays 6pm GMT+1 each week, send them my way. I'll be happy to attempt to include them with my players. :)
I try to be as inclusive as possible and my structure might work for them... might not work too but it's the attempt that matters.
My game is based in Victorian Steampunk setting and they'll be asked to enter with a new level one character. Hope that helps!
Discord: Ancient Mutt#4871 | GM: Order of the Styx: Unseen Servant | Artist: Inkarnate
^--------- This is probably the best post I've seen, at least today.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Other than the awkwardness that would ensue, AL frowns heavily on anything considered close to PvP. :-D