Hack & Slash maniac

[Briguy123]

I am dealing with a problem player and am looking for some advice. I am currently involved in a homebrew fantasy campaign using D20 rules. The GM is very creative and has put a lot of time and effort into developing his world and his NPC's. He is great at creating a good atmosphere and flavor for the game.

However, we have one player who is only interested in dungeon crawls and combat. Even when we are exploring a dungeon he chafes and complains when we stop to make a plan. His idea if tactics is to move as quickly as possible to the next group of monsters and charge in head first.

To make matters worse, he has tried to appoint himself as the group leader in spite of the fact that his character is only sixteen years old. We generally ignore him when he tries to order us around, but eventually he charges off without us. The usually results in the party putting itself at risk in order to rescue him. I am the groups healer and my character has twice been reduced to 1 hp while fighting through dangerous monsters in order to save him from death.

To top it all off, he claims to be well versed in the system, but we constantly have to remind him how the rules work. "No you can't hide while you are in plain sight of the enemy if you are only a second level rogue, and you don't get your sneak attack bonus while firing a bow at medium to long range!"

The GM tries to reign him in but there is only so much one can do. I have discussed this with some of the other players and we don't want to ask the problem player to leave. It was a pick up game that started at the FLGS so he has every right to be there, but his style of play does not mesh with the rest of us and puts a crimp in our enjoyment of an otherwise excellent campaign.

Does anyone have any suggestions?

[bjbrown]

<P>At some point, you have to kick out the player who ruins the game for everyone. But you're bent on giving the guy a chance. So-</P><P>If it hasn't happened already, someone (probably the GM) needs to have a chat with him as to waht is expected when playing your game. Explain to him that while some groups are fine with hack-n-slash, that's not your group's style. Be specific with him on things he's done, and what would have been acceptable for him to do.</P><P>During play, whenever he does something rash, the GM should stop play and chat with him about why is character is doing a particular action.</P><P>As for your play, stop risking it all when his character is putting himself in harm's way. Let him know, "The next time you jump out into combat by yourself, I'm not risking my character to save you." The next time he announces he's wading out into combat by yourself, give him a chance to re-think it: "Remember I'm not saving you this time." Ultimately, if he does stupid dangerous things, let the character die. If you keep saving him from stupidity, he's going to continue with the stupidity. (In my experience, many players have a hard time understanding the risk-of-death concept until I don't pull a <I>deux-ex-machina</I> and actually let one die. Then they start considering non-combat options more seriously.)</P><P>It sounds like his problem with the rules may not be so much with not understanding rules, but that he doesn't actually imagine the action in his head. That one can't go into hiding mode while directly observed isn't a rules question, it's a common-sense question. Just remind him to try to imagine what he's proposing. And when the GM makes a rules decision, the other players can help by saying that they agree with the GM. If he's constantly a one-person minority, he'll feel the pressure to re-adjust his thinking.</P><P>It's completely fair to tell him flat out that he needs to start doing certain things if he wants to continue playing with your group. You can be soft in the telling if you want ("We really like you, but ..."), but he's not going to change unless you tell him what he needs to do, and that he's no longer invited unless he starts doing it.</P>

[MoonHunter]

Again, I agree with above. He needs a serious talking too before he ruins the game. But if you have to keep him and want to reform him....

First: Allow Darwin to be right and don't risk yourself to rescue him. Then the player will have to sit out a few sessions until you get to a place where his replacement can "walk in". This wait period can be very theraputic for "attack anything" characters.

In addition investment in the character can produce much in the way of "survival instinct". Use a required character history from all players: A player turns in a written history of their character, that explains where the character came from, where they learned the skills they have, what their characters are like, and some of the people they know. Upon completion, they receive 1-1000 Exp based on completeness and usefulness of the conception. Allow players to rewrite their conception piece every now and again, in an attempt to get a better score. ("Okay the old one was worth 325, it is now worth 500, take the 175 exps).

The time and effort invested should meet a certain standard. If they don't they can not be accepted. The more effort invested into a character, the more careful most players are in keeping them alive... if for no other reasons than to avoid having to do it again.

In addition, you get roleplay benefits. If you have a back history that you actually understand, then you have something that you understand to build upon and roleplay with. If players start linking their conceptions (oh you have a master of the sword in Altair.. cool then I will use him for my sword master too), then it gives them something to work with each other with. If the player will not roleplay, at least the GM can hold him in check due to not accepting a character conception and history.


Second: he seems not to be roleplaying at all. Have your GM decree that all EXP will be modified by your roleplaying and lack of meta-gaming comments. (Your combat maniac will probably be speaking in numbers all the time, if they are anything like the ones I have encountered).

The roleplay modifier is a D&D/ D20 tool, or for any gamesystem that does not have a built in roleplay reward system (rolemaster).

Rate the player's roleplay and meta-game performance from 1-10. 1 is for no roleplaying (like your example); 10 is the level of roleplaying you expect of your players (not what they do, but what they should be doing) and minimal use of meta-game knowledge and speak. The RP modifier for a given session is that number divided by 10, giving you a range between .1x and 1x

Take the amount of experience points the characters earned due to defeating threats, taking out traps, and so on, for that session. Multiply that by the multiplier. That is the amount they earn for that run.

Yes, bad roleplayers earn a fraction of their expected experience.

Watch your roleplay dead players and tactial manics scream, especially if other players are adequate in their roleplaying. They will begin to see the metagaming advantages of roleplaying. Those that don't will only advance a tiny amount, while those that do will advance at a good clip in comparison.

This technique has been used by several GMs with several different power gamers and rules lawyers and tacticians. In every case, they improved their roleplaying level to at least the minimally acceptable amount.

[Koshka]

Count another vote for not rescuing him. If the game is using alignments, I'm certain someone can come up with a doubletalk justification :) . ("Gee, it's too bad we weren't in time.")

You might also talk to the GM about changing the monsters a bit. There are some critters in the 3.0 Monster Manual who are death on paws if you don't use good tactics against them. Toss a pack of something special into the game, let the idiot get shredded, then let him watch the rest of the group use good tactics and waste them easily.

(I don't know what level the characters are at, but at 6-8 level girallons are nasty . Claw, Claw, Claw, Claw, Bite, and Rend.)

[DoctorItron]

I have an alternative to killing the PC:

When a PC runs off from the group, the GM can fudge the adventure so there's nothing down that corridor. All the intersting things are elsewhere. The GM can say something like "You head down that corridor and see nothing of interest. Do you continue?"

If the PC continues on, alone, then the GM can say "Okay, your character is busy searching. I'll get back to you." The GM then turns and runs the main group for a while, leaving Mr. Charge Into Combat out of the game.

It's a gentler approach than killing the PC (or the player). It also doesn't make the rest of the group wait while the GM has to run a solo combat.

[DocMan]

Nah... if you let him search without finding anything he'll get all snarky about "this big area I searched that didn't have anything in it!" Better is to have him head out on his own, and get stuck in a trap. Not a lethal trap, just something designed to keep him in one place for a while. Just make sure he can't get out of it, and can't call for help. Then shift focus to the rest of the party... for the rest of the evening.

The message here is "If you run off, you end up doing nothing, and gaining no experience... and the party may not find you."

Doc

[Ben Seeman]

Kick him out.... but let his character get killed first.

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Koshka
You might also talk to the GM about changing the monsters a bit. There are some critters in the 3.0 Monster Manual who are death on paws if you don't use good tactics against them. Toss a pack of something special into the game, let the idiot get shredded, then let him watch the rest of the group use good tactics and waste them easily.

(I don't know what level the characters are at, but at 6-8 level girallons are nasty . Claw, Claw, Claw, Claw, Bite, and Rend.)

That's already been tried. One of the monsters that my character risked life and limb to rescue him from was a troll. The Troll had reach plus a bite, claw, claw, rend attack sequence. Rather than staying at range and using his bow, our brilliant hack master decided to tumble past the troll and attack from a flanking position. He did this in spite of the fact that he has the precise shot feat that allows him to fire into melee without the risk of hitting friendlies. The DC of the tumble was ridiculously high but he managed to pull that off. However, this put him well within reach of the troll, and being a third level rogue he did not have enough hit points to survive a full barage from the troll.

Sure enough, the troll landed two successful claw attacks which gauranteed rending damage. The only thing that saved the thief was a feat that forced the troll to roll twice for damage on a possible killing blow and take the lowest roll. The rogue was reduced to -7 HP's, and lay bleeding at the troll's side. My character rushed to him, absorbing an attack of opportunity in order to cast a cure minor wounds spell that stabilized the bleeding. What did the player learn from this?


"I don't have enough hit points, so I'll take a level of fighter the next time we level up."

After this weeks session, I believe the GM is getting a little frustrated with him. We encountered a secret door made of solid stone, but could not find a mechanism to open it. After knocking on it we determined by the sound that it was probably very thick and heavy. Mr. Hack n' Slash then decided to break down the door, and without announcing his intentions gave it a hearty kick. The GM called him a dumbass and ruled that the kick had broken his foot. He suffered a -1 penalty to all activities involving movement (including combat) for the rest of the session.

I think that if Mr. Hack n' Slash continues his reckless behaviour, the GM will ask him to leave. Which takes the onus off of myself and the other players.

[Kaychsea]

We had one of them. Whenever we came across anything that required a bit of thought, Mr Short-Attention-Span would charge in before the plan was worked out.
We came across a large chamber with 5 trolls in the middle of it chowing down on someone or other. We draw back preparing spells and oil while he barrels round the corner with a battle cry. He managed to end up in the middle of three fireballs and some flaming oil flasks. Two trolls survived the impact and had him in kit form by the time the follow up attack went in.
He swore blind that we told him to go in first!:rolleyes:

[Koshka]

Originally posted by Briguy123
Sure enough, the troll landed two successful claw attacks which gauranteed rending damage. The only thing that saved the thief was a feat that forced the troll to roll twice for damage on a possible killing blow and take the lowest roll.


Hmm, haven't run across that feat, but then I'm not running a rogue in the 3rd edition game I'm currently in.

OK, nearly killing him didn't work. If the GM bounces him, that solves the problem; otherwise how are his saves versus illusions? Sounds of monsters (created by magic) down a dark corridor, he charges straight toward them and lands in an immobilizing trap, rest of group "can't get to him, the real threat is over here", he sits around doing nothing all session and gets no XP or treasure as a result. (This could mean he walks on his own, but is that really a problem?)

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Koshka
Hmm, haven't run across that feat, but then I'm not running a rogue in the 3rd edition game I'm currently in.



It is a homeland feat designed by the GM so it's not in any published work. It can come in handy though.

[zornwil]

I think it's best to ask him to leave. As players, you have that right as well (although I'm ignorant of the personal dynamics, if he's the GM's best friend that's a different kettle of fish, though as you say if the GM is getting fed up perhaps not).

It's important you just say that it's a style of play issue, that it isn't fitting what the group wants.

Do you guys like to play hack-n-slash on occassion? Maybe if the GM, or someone else wants to GM, you could play such a game every so often. Then he can still have his roleplaying fun every so often.

My oldest and best (or at least one of best) friends always preferred to play hack-n-slash. He'd wander off bored when there wasn't anything to kill. Fortunately he didn't have to be asked to leave - as his style fit in less and less he toned down a bit but ultimately left the last gaming group he and I were both in of his own accord. Which brings to mind - maybe he'd be content to just join in when it was appropriate to kill, otherwise hanging out with the group as a person and his character a sort of absent-minded NPC except for combat?

Good luck in any event.

[Phraze]

Originally posted by Kaychsea
We had one of them. Whenever we came across anything that required a bit of thought, Mr Short-Attention-Span would charge in before the plan was worked out.


It does sound like a clash of play styles here, but to be a bit of a devil's advocate, I have been that guy on occasion. Once in a new campaign, our party went to explore a supposedly abandoned ruin. We sat outside the front door for 30 minutes to an hour, trying to figure out how we wanted to open the door - what party order, what if there were traps, who would cover what corner of the room if there were an ambush. I finally couldn't take it anymore and just said, "I'm opening the door and going in." The party followed helplessly, bleating protests all the way. Any time we reached a point where the planning took more than 5-10 minutes I charged ahead again. Can't remember if I got killed out or not. All I remember for sure is that if I hadn't done what I did, we would probably have spent at least another hour sitting outside the dungeon, trying to concoct a perfect plan that would have been blown the moment we opened the door. I would rather get killed out than spend the whole game sitting outside of doors, debating perfect plans.

[badger3k]

Originally posted by Phraze
It does sound like a clash of play styles here, but to be a bit of a devil's advocate, I have been that guy on occasion. Once in a new campaign, our party went to explore a supposedly abandoned ruin. We sat outside the front door for 30 minutes to an hour, trying to figure out how we wanted to open the door - what party order, what if there were traps, who would cover what corner of the room if there were an ambush. I finally couldn't take it anymore and just said, "I'm opening the door and going in." The party followed helplessly, bleating protests all the way. Any time we reached a point where the planning took more than 5-10 minutes I charged ahead again. Can't remember if I got killed out or not. All I remember for sure is that if I hadn't done what I did, we would probably have spent at least another hour sitting outside the dungeon, trying to concoct a perfect plan that would have been blown the moment we opened the door. I would rather get killed out than spend the whole game sitting outside of doors, debating perfect plans.

That can work both ways - one player ignored all the signs saying "vampire", even opening the coffin - the vamp ended up draining levels from other people, but he came off scott free. Until he grabbed the magic-draining rock. Lost half his items, and paid 20K gold to reenchant the sorcerers dagger he was carrying. And before anyone says grudge monster, the stome was the object of the quest. Sometimes it pays to think, sometimes it don't.

edited - add that I've had players like that. Trying to make it fun for them meant making it less fun for others. I changed to make it more balanced, to try to make others the center of attention. The hack-monger played a little more then stopped gaming, since he wasn't having fun all the time. But everyone else still has fun, so it worked out.

[Phraze]

And by my post above, I didn't mean to suggest that this isn't a problem, or that the problem player is not the real problem. In my experience, this type of situation usually works itself out, as others above have said: the GM runs his tyle of campaign, and the problem player, not getting what he wants out of the game, drops out. It doesn't look like that is happening here, although maybe it's because, by trying to teach him caution with tough monsters, the GM is giving him exactly what he wants - combat. I agree with the guys who've said give him an immobilizing trap; boredom will probably bring him to leave on his own.

[McCoy]

What bjbrown said. Tell both the character and the player that the next time he goes hareing off by himself he will not have backup, then stick to it.

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Phraze
And by my post above, I didn't mean to suggest that this isn't a problem, or that the problem player is not the real problem. In my experience, this type of situation usually works itself out, as others above have said: the GM runs his tyle of campaign, and the problem player, not getting what he wants out of the game, drops out. It doesn't look like that is happening here, although maybe it's because, by trying to teach him caution with tough monsters, the GM is giving him exactly what he wants - combat. I agree with the guys who've said give him an immobilizing trap; boredom will probably bring him to leave on his own.

Part of the problem is that the player in question seems to be trying to force everyone, including the GM into playing a Hack n' Slash killfest. He has ignored GM warnings about the consequences of his actions, and seems determined to undercut any attempts at role playing or planning. He says he wants to stay with our group and has even abandoned another game in favor of ours, though from his descriptions it sounds like the other game is more his style of play.

We are not the type of group that will stand at a door and argue for thirty minutes but we do take time to plan our attacks when we know whats ahead.

[Killer Shrike]

Originally posted by Ben Seeman
Kick him out.... but let his character get killed first. Agreed.

Some people "Just dont get it", and never will.

And dont feel guilty about it either, he'll be happier in a hack & slash group and your group will be happier without him. Everyone wins.

[Pteryx]

Originally posted by Briguy123
Part of the problem is that the player in question seems to be trying to force everyone, including the GM into playing a Hack n' Slash killfest. He has ignored GM warnings about the consequences of his actions, and seems determined to undercut any attempts at role playing or planning. He says he wants to stay with our group and has even abandoned another game in favor of ours, though from his descriptions it sounds like the other game is more his style of play.

That pretty much dictates what's necessary: kick him out. Immediately. No room for arguments.

Though I do wonder something; do you have any idea why he wants to be in your group in particular? Is it some kind of control complex or something? -- Pteryx

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Pteryx
That pretty much dictates what's necessary: kick him out. Immediately. No room for arguments.

Though I do wonder something; do you have any idea why he wants to be in your group in particular? Is it some kind of control complex or something? -- Pteryx

He has tried to set himself up as the party leader, but we ignore his "orders" and do what the actual party leader suggests. Now that we are familiar with his tactics, about the only way he influences the party is to charge ahead and put himself at risk. He's also fond of ordering people to take actions that they were most likely to do anyway. For example, I am the groups healer. On more than one occasion he has "ordered" me to heal someone in the party who had suffered severe injuries. In one case I was already casting the spell when he spoke up.

When we asked him why he was giving up the other game, he said that we were a better group of roleplayers, which is confusing since he gets impatient when we are role playing rather than fighting. He got extremely frustrated when I tried to resolve an encounter in which we were outnumbered with diplomacy.

It would be much easier if he were a complete jerk. He can be pleasant in general conversation, he's just pushy. He doesn't seem to understand that there is more than one style of play, and that we don't want to play the way he does. Unfortunately for him, we ignore his attempts to establish dominance.

I've dealt with similar problem in a fantasy hero game that I ran several years back. However, I was the GM, the game was at my house, and the player in question left of his own accord when he realized that I was neither tolerant of munchkins nor could I be bullied into changing my style of GMing to suit one person at the expense of everyone else.

[Victim]

Does he play other characters this way too?

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Victim
Does he play other characters this way too?

He just started his second character in this cmpaign. We've run two sessions since the new character was introduced, and he's playing true to form, reckless and pushy.

[Pteryx]

Originally posted by Briguy123
When we asked him why he was giving up the other game, he said that we were a better group of roleplayers, which is confusing since he gets impatient when we are role playing rather than fighting. He got extremely frustrated when I tried to resolve an encounter in which we were outnumbered with diplomacy.

It's quite possible that by "better role-players" he meant "more competent hack-and-slashers". Which, in D&D, you usually have to be in order to survive long enough to actually role-play.

Ask him to define "role-playing". If he repeats near-verbatim the "What is roleplaying?" section from the PHB, say no, you want to know what RP means to him. Chances are he'll define it in terms of a power fantasy. Say that's the wrong answer for this group, and if he doesn't learn otherwise and act on it, he's gone, no buts. -- Pteryx

[altamaros]

Originally posted by Briguy123
He says he wants to stay with our group and has even abandoned another game in favor of ours, though from his descriptions it sounds like the other game is more his style of play.

Maybe i'm mean to think that but :

Original version "i abandoned another game in favor of yours"

Translated version : "the other group kicked me out"

...

[Victim]

Originally posted by Briguy123
He just started his second character in this cmpaign. We've run two sessions since the new character was introduced, and he's playing true to form, reckless and pushy.

Okay. I'd be hesitant judge someone's IC playing based on one character, especially since you said the character was rather young.

A reckless, pushy, easily bored 16 year old? Who would have thought?

[Trencher]

I did not bother too read all the replys cause there really is only one thing to do, and that is to KICK HIM OUT OF THE GROUP!

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Victim
Okay. I'd be hesitant judge someone's IC playing based on one character, especially since you said the character was rather young.

A reckless, pushy, easily bored 16 year old? Who would have thought?

His new character, which entered the campaign three weeks ago is an Elven wizard who is well into adulthood (centuries old). He plays it exactly the same as the he played the 16 year old rogue. There is very little role playing to speak of. He rarely interacts in character. He spends most of his urging us (player to player, not character to character) to get to the next combat. When we are role-playing out of combat he either sits there impatiently or starts looking through gaming books. The only time he seems to enjoy himself is when he is rolling dice and doing damage.

At first we were willing to give him a chance. The campaign started as a pick-up game at the local gaming store, and it was open to anyone. We had several players come and go, but we had a core group who have similar playing styles. The problem player is the odd man out. He does not enjoy the type of play that the rest of the group engages in and actively tries to change the focus of the game to his style of play; combat, combat and more combat with no planning and no role-playing. If we were to give in and play it his way, we might as well be playing a multi-player video game.

[Trencher]

For the love of DICE!
Kick-him-out!! :mad: :mad: :mad:
If he get's annoyed tell him that a random guy on the internet told you it were for the best.

[BlackSword]

I agree with the previous posts, there are several options
a) talk with him, tell him that it is not the style of play for this game, that the group would rather develop a plan and if he doesn't like it then he can go get himself skewered while the rest of party finds a better way to do things. Explain things like the scene in Princess Bride where they get past 30(?) guards by out thinking them, not killing them all.
b) let his characters die early and often. A quick way to learn is to spend half of the game or more making up a new character because the last one became orc furniture.
c) If he does annoy the entire group then tell him to ship out, the group is playing it for enjoyment, not to be harrassed because some idiot isn't willing to wait five seconds for a plan.

I don't know which steps have been taken, but I would try to do it in that order to be fair to the player. If he's young and doesn't know any better try to to teach him to be a better role-player, if he's older and just wants to beat people up, have him find another group.

My guess for him leaving the other group is that he either wasn't getting enough attention (which your group gives him when they come to save his sorry ass), he hasn't mastered powergaming, so other people had better killer PCs then him, or the other group was so poorly co-ordinated they spent every other session making up a new party.

[Killer Shrike]

Dump the player; he's dead weight.

[Briguy123]

Originally posted by Killer Shrike
Dump the player; he's dead weight.

I getting the feeling that people think our group should get rid of Mr. Hack n' Slash. Maybe I'm just grasping at straws.:D

Yesterday, I talked to the player who runs our paladin and official group leader. We agreed to talk to the problem player. If we can't get a satisfactory response, we're going to approach the GM. The next time he runs off on his own, we won't save him, and if he complains we'll suggest that he find a group more suited to his gaming needs.

[Trencher]

Uff da... I thought -you- were the GM, if you are going to ask the Gm to kick the hacker out, then do it like this: Tell the hacker that you are fed up with his attitude and that you are going to ask the Gm to kick him if he does not shape up and gets with the program. If there is no improvement then make good your threat and take it up with the Gm, but do it while the hacker is there! (So that he can defend himself)
Don't do anything that can be perceived as going behinds someone’s back, it's usually better to get these things out in the open.