Based one some excellent feedback here on D&D Beyond and elsewhere I revised and re-organized my post. The blog is new so I'm still working on finding my voice.
_THRD
Every D&D table is different but as a DM, knowing your players and what type they fall under can make your life easier. I took the time to breakdown the players in my campaign. Perhaps you'll recognize your players here or even see yourself.
Meet the Indecision Maker, the Story Mode Gamer, the Wild Card, the Time Bomb, and the Utility Player.
Perfectionist ABSOLUTELY. We (me and the other guy who DM's on alternating weeks) has to be absolutely CERTAIN her turn is done every time. If she doesn't fully use Action, bonus action, Movement, and reaction she feels like her turn is wasted. Also, she has the mindset of "Aw my attack didn't crit" or "I don't even have advantage!" When those things are supposed to be "extra" in the first place lol
I'm not sure if I'd show this to the group though, I feel like it might ruffle some feathers lol
You made it plain you're simply talking about the personalities that show up at your table so no biggie, but man. Some of these seem pretty one-sided.
Your 'Story Mode Gamer', for example, is a pretty cutting indictment of players who favor the 'Expert' mode of play. As an ardent fan of 'Expert' mode characters myself, I can say that telling us we hate "being put in danger" is pretty hurtful q_q. I have no issue being put into dangerous situations, and most Expert players would likely agree. What we're looking for is mastery, not EZ Mode. An Expert doesn't want to be "pretty good" at their core focus skills - they want to be ******* amazing at their core focus. We're the players that most hate D&D's bizarre, unpleasant swinginess and feel like a highly trained expert should be able to easily breeze through their area of expertise, but we're also usually the first to jump at applying those skills to a powerful challenge. Your Experts want their expertise to be challenged appropriately, so they can demonstrate their mastery through tackling challenges nobody else could even dream of achieving. Most players see "DC 30" as a warning. Experts see "DC 30" as an invitation, and are usually totally ready for DC 35. Or higher.
Aiming for super-high ability checks is also often a way players protest DMs who like to indulge in "Funny" mishaps when someone rolls a low roll. A DM who constantly breaks tools or inflicts damage when his players roll 1s on skill checks because "Hahaha it's funny watching you guys pratfall!" will often find his players finding ways to avoid losing expensive tools or suffering incidental damage they have to burn off resources to clean up in the field. An Expert will say "yeah, I rolled a 1, but my check total is still a 13. My tools are ******* fine, and I did not trip, hit my head on the anvil and suffer 2d10 blunt damage. Please just say 'you're having an off day and didn't quite succeed', thank you very much."
Yurei1453, You're right these are one dimensional. I tried to imply that these are not an end all/be all for describing a player but short hand for identifying dominant styles of play. Maybe I wasn't clear enough . . .
You make a good distinction between Expert and my Story Mode Gamer. In this case I don't think they're actually the same thing. Your use of the word mastery is illustrating. That implies taking the time to put in the work to become the epitome of their profession. The Story Mode Gamer does not want to put in that amount of effort. They want everything to come easily.
Say you've got an encounter with a town guard you have to sneak past. The Expert will ask around town to see if anyone knows anything about them. They'll consider the time of day and how long that guard has been on duty. When they begin talking to the guard they'll use insight checks to see how they react to the conversation and try to discern the best way forward. The Story Mode Gamer will walk up, say something like "Your boss said you're done for the day you can go home" and roll a 24 deception check hoping it's enough.
I don't have any true Experts at my table. Sometimes people will embrace this for a particular challenge or encounter but none of my players embodies this. It's a good one though.
Some DMs do embrace the critical failure method but I haven't found it particularly enjoyable. I will occasionally make light of a situation if the occasion seems right and inspiration hits, but at my table its in the spirit of fun, not competition. At least that's what I'm aiming for.
I've actually had this conversation with my players, talking about their dominant types. In my case we're all older so this sort of self reflection stings a little but doesn't wound. Question for you LeBattery, I tried to state that these types weren't negatives, but simply descriptions and tools. Does it seem like I'm picking on people?
As a player, I have to say I’m probably a bit of a blend between the “Paralyzed” Indecision Maker, the Story Mode Gamer (though split between yours and Yurei’s description of one) and the Utility Player.
I do enjoy playing games in story mode, because I usually play video games for the story. That doesn’t mean I want easy mode, it means I want a fun and epic story. So I want my character to be a great hero who excels at what they are good at. That doesn’t mean I want to be good at everything, just good at the niche within the group that I fill. If I’m playing a charismatic face, I don’t care that I suck at athletics. If I’m playing a big strong brute, I don’t care if I don’t know what this magical scroll can do. So long as I’m good at what my character should be good at, that’s all that matters.
Then there is the Paralysis. I tend to play casters because I like the options they provide. Sometimes I have my turn down, knowing exactly what I want to accomplish. Sometimes however, I get stuck not knowing what to do. Usually, it’s not because I want to maximize potential synergy, but simply that I’m not sure what would be best for my team. Admittedly, it doesn’t help when different teammates give me conflicting ideas. I want to make sure I’m being a good team player and it’s not always clear if protecting an ally, attacking an enemy, healing or some other option is the best in the long run. So, I sometimes freeze up. Luckily it’s getting better with more experience and it is also more dependent of party composition and what they are able to bring to the table but I don’t think this will ever truly go away.
Then you have the Utility player. I probably am hands down the biggest utility player in my group. I honestly just happy to play and simply want everyone to have a good time. I tend to be the one most open to what our DM is trying to accomplish and most interested in the plot, lore, and current events in the game. I am also usually the one to follow the party unless it really goes against my characters desires or beliefs. I usually play more neutral and go with the follow characters because of this. I don’t mind party drama and find it fun to witness (so long as it doesn’t get out of hand) but I HATE to be the one to cause drama myself unless I’m positive that I won’t upset someone or confident in playing my character in such a manner in the moment. I am a people pleaser and don’t like upsetting others and between that and my anxiety and depression, it can be hard to gauge if I am actually saying something that might upset someone or not, even when it seems most of the time I’m just overthinking things. Luckily I’ve known my current group for many years now, but even then it can be hard at times.
The post was not necessarily cruel, but it did come across as a DM griping about his player issues to some extent. The 'Time Bomb', as one example - the whole of that player's description boiled down to "this guy will disrupt and try to break your game any time their Boredom Meter goes above a certain level, so be careful". That's one way to look at it - or one could ask whether that player is simply not grabbed by the game in question. If the table has been in tense negotiations over political disputes with an elven prince for an hour - or several sessions - and this player finally snaps and says "I break a chair over the nearest elf's head", is that necessarily because he's a bad player and wants to do something dumb to liven up the game?
Is that because he's a jerk, or because he's simply not interested in social intrigue and is done watching everyone else play Shakespearian court drama? If he'd been given an outlet - perhaps a duel against a champion of the elven nobility, to show the group's strength and aid in the negotiations - would he have caused a disruption?
I'm not giving you guff in particular, your post here came across as someone trying to help so that's fine, but part of the discussion is realizing that DMs are not exempt from being the 'Problem Player' at their table. Some player problems are exactly that - players who have Problems and are all too damnably eager to share. But other player problems are often the fault of miscommunication at the table, or a simple mismatch between player and table. The Time Bomb may be a perfectly splendid player with no issues whatsoever in a game where people don't spend an hour of session time negotiating with an elven prince - he's here for action and High Adventure, not politics.
And frankly, given the year we've just got done with, I don't blame anyone for wanting the politics out of their D&D for a little bit X_X
I've actually had this conversation with my players, talking about their dominant types. In my case we're all older so this sort of self reflection stings a little but doesn't wound. Question for you LeBattery, I tried to state that these types weren't negatives, but simply descriptions and tools. Does it seem like I'm picking on people?
I think the reason it might seem like you are picking on people is because you mostly focus on the negative aspects of player behavior. Of the types you describe the Utility Player is the most positive, but it seems to boil down to the people that are having a good time without any analysis of what they like, or why they are enjoying themselves.
For instance, you seem to have a really good grasp on why the Time Bomb acts they way they do, what causes them to become destructive to the game and when they aren't engaged. Similarly you end the description of the Wild Card with:
The other players at the table love seeing this player in action. It’s occasionally fun for the DM too.
This makes it sound like your players are having a good time, but you aren't. Being a DM is a careful balancing act between the fun of all the players and you. It sounds like you are good at diagnosing the things that ruin the fun, but maybe it would be good to look at the things that are fun and engaging for everyone. Doing a break down of the positive characteristics of your players will help you create scenarios that are more fun for both you and them.
Yurei1453, thanks for the feedback. I can see the impression of griping, I'll try and massage the introduction a little bit.
My particular Time Bomb seems to go off from a combination of their inactivity and how long we've been playing. If we're running a political scenario and his character is involved he's happy to negotiate for hours on end. Same for a battle. If he's knocking heads by all means roll iniative. But if some of the other players are taking the spotlight he begins to get a little antsy. Part of this is having a large group of players. Sometimes folks have to take a backseat so others can shine for awhile. That certainly doesn't make him a bad player but it does present an issue for me to keep track off. The closer we get to midnight the more this is likely to happen too FWIW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Its not that it seemed mean or anything, but just like what others said, its mainly focusing on negative aspects. Which is fine! I was thinking the point of it was to lightly poke fun at different stereotypes seen at a table. Everyone's got something they do that can be seen as annoying/something to poke at, which is why I thought your thing was funny! The reason I specifically wouldn't share it at my table is because I know exactly how the player in question would react, and it wouldn't go well xD
Fun article. It seemed good-natured to me and I didn't have a problem with the tone. I think out of my players, the only one who might receive the article poorly is the one often subject to Paralysis - not because of the way you wrote about it, but because from what I've seen part of Paralysis is the anxiety spiral of knowing everyone is waiting on you which makes it even harder to decide what to do. And seeing it acknowledged anywhere is always going to come with an echo of that feeling and the accompanying guilt.
I try to bring the Utility Player mindset but I am definitely part Perfectionist, especially with spellcasters.
On a positive note, that was a useful piece of advice. If a DM knows they have a player who tends to get option-locked and freeze up - especially one prone to anxiety and social humiliation - steering that player towards a class with a straightforward game plan is a good idea. You may also want to take the time to give that player a notecard or something similar that they can reference, build a simple flowchart or other visual aid to try and give them something to knock loose the rocks.
Or ask them if they'd like you to prompt them with an action if you see them starting to lock up, let them know it's okay and you're just trying to help. Some of them will feel humiliated at that and refuse, but some folks are grateful for the direction.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
*UPDATED*
Based one some excellent feedback here on D&D Beyond and elsewhere I revised and re-organized my post. The blog is new so I'm still working on finding my voice.
_THRD
Every D&D table is different but as a DM, knowing your players and what type they fall under can make your life easier. I took the time to breakdown the players in my campaign. Perhaps you'll recognize your players here or even see yourself.
Meet the Indecision Maker, the Story Mode Gamer, the Wild Card, the Time Bomb, and the Utility Player.
http://thathitsrolldamage.com/2021/01/22/the-types-of-players-in-my-group/
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Dungeon Master, Blogger at That Hits, Roll Damage!
https://thathitsrolldamage.com/
WOW. The indecision maker is like WORD FOR WORD one of my players lol
After reading I was like.... Are you one of the people at my table?? lol
My universe of gamers is only the 9 people but I had to think others would recognize the types. Was it the perfectionist or the paralysis?
If you decide to show this to your players let me know what they say or if they recognize themselves.
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Dungeon Master, Blogger at That Hits, Roll Damage!
https://thathitsrolldamage.com/
Perfectionist ABSOLUTELY.
We (me and the other guy who DM's on alternating weeks) has to be absolutely CERTAIN her turn is done every time. If she doesn't fully use Action, bonus action, Movement, and reaction she feels like her turn is wasted. Also, she has the mindset of "Aw my attack didn't crit" or "I don't even have advantage!" When those things are supposed to be "extra" in the first place lol
I'm not sure if I'd show this to the group though, I feel like it might ruffle some feathers lol
You made it plain you're simply talking about the personalities that show up at your table so no biggie, but man. Some of these seem pretty one-sided.
Your 'Story Mode Gamer', for example, is a pretty cutting indictment of players who favor the 'Expert' mode of play. As an ardent fan of 'Expert' mode characters myself, I can say that telling us we hate "being put in danger" is pretty hurtful q_q. I have no issue being put into dangerous situations, and most Expert players would likely agree. What we're looking for is mastery, not EZ Mode. An Expert doesn't want to be "pretty good" at their core focus skills - they want to be ******* amazing at their core focus. We're the players that most hate D&D's bizarre, unpleasant swinginess and feel like a highly trained expert should be able to easily breeze through their area of expertise, but we're also usually the first to jump at applying those skills to a powerful challenge. Your Experts want their expertise to be challenged appropriately, so they can demonstrate their mastery through tackling challenges nobody else could even dream of achieving. Most players see "DC 30" as a warning. Experts see "DC 30" as an invitation, and are usually totally ready for DC 35. Or higher.
Aiming for super-high ability checks is also often a way players protest DMs who like to indulge in "Funny" mishaps when someone rolls a low roll. A DM who constantly breaks tools or inflicts damage when his players roll 1s on skill checks because "Hahaha it's funny watching you guys pratfall!" will often find his players finding ways to avoid losing expensive tools or suffering incidental damage they have to burn off resources to clean up in the field. An Expert will say "yeah, I rolled a 1, but my check total is still a 13. My tools are ******* fine, and I did not trip, hit my head on the anvil and suffer 2d10 blunt damage. Please just say 'you're having an off day and didn't quite succeed', thank you very much."
Please do not contact or message me.
Yurei1453, You're right these are one dimensional. I tried to imply that these are not an end all/be all for describing a player but short hand for identifying dominant styles of play. Maybe I wasn't clear enough . . .
You make a good distinction between Expert and my Story Mode Gamer. In this case I don't think they're actually the same thing. Your use of the word mastery is illustrating. That implies taking the time to put in the work to become the epitome of their profession. The Story Mode Gamer does not want to put in that amount of effort. They want everything to come easily.
Say you've got an encounter with a town guard you have to sneak past. The Expert will ask around town to see if anyone knows anything about them. They'll consider the time of day and how long that guard has been on duty. When they begin talking to the guard they'll use insight checks to see how they react to the conversation and try to discern the best way forward. The Story Mode Gamer will walk up, say something like "Your boss said you're done for the day you can go home" and roll a 24 deception check hoping it's enough.
I don't have any true Experts at my table. Sometimes people will embrace this for a particular challenge or encounter but none of my players embodies this. It's a good one though.
Some DMs do embrace the critical failure method but I haven't found it particularly enjoyable. I will occasionally make light of a situation if the occasion seems right and inspiration hits, but at my table its in the spirit of fun, not competition. At least that's what I'm aiming for.
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Dungeon Master, Blogger at That Hits, Roll Damage!
https://thathitsrolldamage.com/
I've actually had this conversation with my players, talking about their dominant types. In my case we're all older so this sort of self reflection stings a little but doesn't wound. Question for you LeBattery, I tried to state that these types weren't negatives, but simply descriptions and tools. Does it seem like I'm picking on people?
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Dungeon Master, Blogger at That Hits, Roll Damage!
https://thathitsrolldamage.com/
As a player, I have to say I’m probably a bit of a blend between the “Paralyzed” Indecision Maker, the Story Mode Gamer (though split between yours and Yurei’s description of one) and the Utility Player.
I do enjoy playing games in story mode, because I usually play video games for the story. That doesn’t mean I want easy mode, it means I want a fun and epic story. So I want my character to be a great hero who excels at what they are good at. That doesn’t mean I want to be good at everything, just good at the niche within the group that I fill. If I’m playing a charismatic face, I don’t care that I suck at athletics. If I’m playing a big strong brute, I don’t care if I don’t know what this magical scroll can do. So long as I’m good at what my character should be good at, that’s all that matters.
Then there is the Paralysis. I tend to play casters because I like the options they provide. Sometimes I have my turn down, knowing exactly what I want to accomplish. Sometimes however, I get stuck not knowing what to do. Usually, it’s not because I want to maximize potential synergy, but simply that I’m not sure what would be best for my team. Admittedly, it doesn’t help when different teammates give me conflicting ideas. I want to make sure I’m being a good team player and it’s not always clear if protecting an ally, attacking an enemy, healing or some other option is the best in the long run. So, I sometimes freeze up. Luckily it’s getting better with more experience and it is also more dependent of party composition and what they are able to bring to the table but I don’t think this will ever truly go away.
Then you have the Utility player. I probably am hands down the biggest utility player in my group. I honestly just happy to play and simply want everyone to have a good time. I tend to be the one most open to what our DM is trying to accomplish and most interested in the plot, lore, and current events in the game. I am also usually the one to follow the party unless it really goes against my characters desires or beliefs. I usually play more neutral and go with the follow characters because of this. I don’t mind party drama and find it fun to witness (so long as it doesn’t get out of hand) but I HATE to be the one to cause drama myself unless I’m positive that I won’t upset someone or confident in playing my character in such a manner in the moment. I am a people pleaser and don’t like upsetting others and between that and my anxiety and depression, it can be hard to gauge if I am actually saying something that might upset someone or not, even when it seems most of the time I’m just overthinking things. Luckily I’ve known my current group for many years now, but even then it can be hard at times.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
The post was not necessarily cruel, but it did come across as a DM griping about his player issues to some extent. The 'Time Bomb', as one example - the whole of that player's description boiled down to "this guy will disrupt and try to break your game any time their Boredom Meter goes above a certain level, so be careful". That's one way to look at it - or one could ask whether that player is simply not grabbed by the game in question. If the table has been in tense negotiations over political disputes with an elven prince for an hour - or several sessions - and this player finally snaps and says "I break a chair over the nearest elf's head", is that necessarily because he's a bad player and wants to do something dumb to liven up the game?
Is that because he's a jerk, or because he's simply not interested in social intrigue and is done watching everyone else play Shakespearian court drama? If he'd been given an outlet - perhaps a duel against a champion of the elven nobility, to show the group's strength and aid in the negotiations - would he have caused a disruption?
I'm not giving you guff in particular, your post here came across as someone trying to help so that's fine, but part of the discussion is realizing that DMs are not exempt from being the 'Problem Player' at their table. Some player problems are exactly that - players who have Problems and are all too damnably eager to share. But other player problems are often the fault of miscommunication at the table, or a simple mismatch between player and table. The Time Bomb may be a perfectly splendid player with no issues whatsoever in a game where people don't spend an hour of session time negotiating with an elven prince - he's here for action and High Adventure, not politics.
And frankly, given the year we've just got done with, I don't blame anyone for wanting the politics out of their D&D for a little bit X_X
Please do not contact or message me.
I think the reason it might seem like you are picking on people is because you mostly focus on the negative aspects of player behavior. Of the types you describe the Utility Player is the most positive, but it seems to boil down to the people that are having a good time without any analysis of what they like, or why they are enjoying themselves.
For instance, you seem to have a really good grasp on why the Time Bomb acts they way they do, what causes them to become destructive to the game and when they aren't engaged. Similarly you end the description of the Wild Card with:
This makes it sound like your players are having a good time, but you aren't. Being a DM is a careful balancing act between the fun of all the players and you. It sounds like you are good at diagnosing the things that ruin the fun, but maybe it would be good to look at the things that are fun and engaging for everyone. Doing a break down of the positive characteristics of your players will help you create scenarios that are more fun for both you and them.
Yurei1453, thanks for the feedback. I can see the impression of griping, I'll try and massage the introduction a little bit.
My particular Time Bomb seems to go off from a combination of their inactivity and how long we've been playing. If we're running a political scenario and his character is involved he's happy to negotiate for hours on end. Same for a battle. If he's knocking heads by all means roll iniative. But if some of the other players are taking the spotlight he begins to get a little antsy. Part of this is having a large group of players. Sometimes folks have to take a backseat so others can shine for awhile. That certainly doesn't make him a bad player but it does present an issue for me to keep track off. The closer we get to midnight the more this is likely to happen too FWIW.
I spend way too much time thinking about D&D. So much that I had to start writing it down.
Dungeon Master, Blogger at That Hits, Roll Damage!
https://thathitsrolldamage.com/
Its not that it seemed mean or anything, but just like what others said, its mainly focusing on negative aspects. Which is fine! I was thinking the point of it was to lightly poke fun at different stereotypes seen at a table. Everyone's got something they do that can be seen as annoying/something to poke at, which is why I thought your thing was funny!
The reason I specifically wouldn't share it at my table is because I know exactly how the player in question would react, and it wouldn't go well xD
Fun article. It seemed good-natured to me and I didn't have a problem with the tone. I think out of my players, the only one who might receive the article poorly is the one often subject to Paralysis - not because of the way you wrote about it, but because from what I've seen part of Paralysis is the anxiety spiral of knowing everyone is waiting on you which makes it even harder to decide what to do. And seeing it acknowledged anywhere is always going to come with an echo of that feeling and the accompanying guilt.
I try to bring the Utility Player mindset but I am definitely part Perfectionist, especially with spellcasters.
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
On a positive note, that was a useful piece of advice. If a DM knows they have a player who tends to get option-locked and freeze up - especially one prone to anxiety and social humiliation - steering that player towards a class with a straightforward game plan is a good idea. You may also want to take the time to give that player a notecard or something similar that they can reference, build a simple flowchart or other visual aid to try and give them something to knock loose the rocks.
Or ask them if they'd like you to prompt them with an action if you see them starting to lock up, let them know it's okay and you're just trying to help. Some of them will feel humiliated at that and refuse, but some folks are grateful for the direction.
Please do not contact or message me.