Am I being to extreme?

[Darth Jerod]

So I have a player who likes to fancy himself as a breaker of game systems. Currently he has a Razor Claw shifter, Monk multiclassed into Wizard (why I have no idea because it just does not fit his background). I have a lot of fun beating this character down because of how great this guy thinks his character is. So if I daze him, he crys. If I knock him prone, he cries. if I slow him down? you get the picture.

So this week they all leveled up to 6. He wanted to take Trap Finding Skill Utility 6 from PHB3, then take the feat Predatory Magic for his razorclaw shifting ability.

He had me baffled so I gave him some suggestions, one of which was Improved Unarmed Strike for from a d8 to a d10 on unarmed attacks. Now granted, this is also situational but I give a lot of OA's and the warlord gives his free attacks to any who have combat advantage and the monk is usually right there for it.

He said no to me, said it does not fit in with his character.

Now do I just let this frustration build and keep the game up of just poking at the flaws of his character during combat or do I sit him off to the side and tell him he has some serious issues with his character?

Right now the guys who are always in the store are taking bets I will take his character out this weekend when we start the campaign back up. Basically I think I just have a problem with the Monk as it is presented in the PHB. I absolutely hate the power Spinning Leopard Maneuver. While yes it is a daily, being able to shift your movement and hit every target once that you pass is way over powering in my opinion. It is a level 1 daily for crying out loud.

Now I did clip his wings so to speak in the last game we played, I increased the size of the area of the map and had a lot of ranged attacks and that hindered him greatly. But really? I need to do that all the time? I do not want to keep Daze,Slow,prone his character all the time because that is not fun for me or him.

Should I just kill him and let him baffle me with another crazy character? He is talking a Kobold, which I would probably like. His character just is not fitting in with the mix. His background is also weird.

I have been running games for a long time and I have never ever wanted to off a character as much as I do with this one. Anytime I think D&D I think of this character and ways to kill him off. I have been at this over 18 or so years. I think I have bloodlust.

Anyone else out there ever have this issue with a player? Or am I just crazy?

[Steelfiredragon]

tell him thethundercats called and wanted Tigra back.
no your not likely being overextreme though....

kill him off already, just do it in style OR in Pathfinder's world of Golarion( yes I know different world. ruleset, etc; but bear with me) there is a well that if yoiu drink from it it kills the drinker and reincarnates them into something else like that kobold he was talking about.


just have his character drink on by force.

though this might not be the best idea....

[Darth Jerod]

tell him thethundercats called and wanted Tigra back.
no your not likely being overextreme though....

kill him off already, just do it in style OR in Pathfinder's world of Golarion( yes I know different world. ruleset, etc; but bear with me) there is a well that if yoiu drink from it it kills the drinker and reincarnates them into something else like that kobold he was talking about.


just have his character drink on by force.

though this might not be the best idea....

See he is the 2nd shifter in the group. wtf. he dies tomorrow. I am going to use a white dragon on them, a sibling to the one they killed in Kobold Hall. This might be where he can introduce his new character. I am also going to do it nice and quick like.

[Nai_Calus]

Have you tried actually sitting down with him like a grown-up and having an actual discussion in which you lay out to him that his character is bothering you and ask him to tone it down/change it?

Because frankly, if I figured out that my DM hadn't talked to me and had instead just decided to deliberately kill my character, I'd be pissed, and if I didn't leave the group then and there, and wanted to be childish and petty in return, I'd make another, even more ridiculous character just to screw with them. I'd be pissed if it happened to another player.

And what's wrong with Spinning Leopard Maneuver? One, it's a daily, two, you're both reading it completely wrong:

Effect: You shift your speed and can make the following attack once against each enemy that you move adjacent to during the shift.

Once. You have moved adjacent to an enemy during the shift. You attack him. It doesn't matter if you move adjacent to him again, you have already attacked him once.

Also, I seem to be frequently one of the very few DMs that believes this, but I'll let you in on a little DMing secret:
It's OK to let the PCs be awesome. They've invested a lot of their time and effort into their little collection of stats, and it is OK if you don't thwart that at every turn. Similarly, it's not necessary to be an antagonistic DM. As a player, and as a DM for that matter, I've noticed that the more the DM is rubbing their hands and cackling before the fight, the less anyone but the DM enjoys it. Not every battlefield has to be specifically designed to screw the players, not every monster has to be chosen specially to nullify everything they can do.

[Darth Jerod]

Have you tried actually sitting down with him like a grown-up and having an actual discussion in which you lay out to him that his character is bothering you and ask him to tone it down/change it?

Because frankly, if I figured out that my DM hadn't talked to me and had instead just decided to deliberately kill my character, I'd be pissed, and if I didn't leave the group then and there, and wanted to be childish and petty in return, I'd make another, even more ridiculous character just to screw with them. I'd be pissed if it happened to another player.

Actually yes we have sat down, I talked to him about my issues with him. I did it in my Star Wars campaign where we all had a character generation day. When he started making a character that ran contrary to the story era and style of game they all played. He insisted this was the character for the game. After playing the first session the players talked to him then and said his characters seem to not fit the typical mold and they seem broken.

I am not the only DM who has talked with him. He has had problems with two others who run games at the store, in fact he says he does not understand why everyone tells him this.



And what's wrong with Spinning Leopard Maneuver? One, it's a daily, two, you're both reading it completely wrong:

Effect: You shift your speed and can make the following attack once against each enemy that you move adjacent to during the shift.

Once. You have moved adjacent to an enemy during the shift. You attack him. It doesn't matter if you move adjacent to him again, you have already attacked him once.

Right he can shift 6 go adjacent to several enemies and hit them once each during that move. that can be a lot of enemies. To me that is a perception thing and it seems broken to me. I do not like any of the PHB3 classes. That is just me.


Also, I seem to be frequently one of the very few DMs that believes this, but I'll let you in on a little DMing secret:
It's OK to let the PCs be awesome. They've invested a lot of their time and effort into their little collection of stats, and it is OK if you don't thwart that at every turn. Similarly, it's not necessary to be an antagonistic DM. As a player, and as a DM for that matter, I've noticed that the more the DM is rubbing their hands and cackling before the fight, the less anyone but the DM enjoys it. Not every battlefield has to be specifically designed to screw the players, not every monster has to be chosen specially to nullify everything they can do.

I must not need the secret actually because I poll for feedback from the players and each and everyone of them keeps coming back. they tell me they love the game and they want to bring friends. It is not just for the enjoyment of the players the DM needs a little fun as well.

Those are the boss fights for me. I let the players do a lot of off the wall things, I have a 10 year old in my game I have to expect a lot of crazy things when he gets going. I laugh my ass off when I roll natural twenties off, I tell my players its time to die and they all freaking love it. My players are not wimps. Here is a Fact: When I do cackle and rub my hands together the players step up their game and bring it to me. They know I am not GIVING them the game and they are working for it.

When I make easy encounters they actually dislike it. When I worry I am throwing too hard of things at them, they think I am going soft.

It just so happened that in yesterdays game they came up against a cold based enemy, he had the ability to root himself to the ground and keep from being forced to move. This effected the tactics the group usually employs with the enemy to control the flow of the enemies movement and keep them near or locked down to the melee guys.

Without trying to go after the monk, he went all solo on the big bad and did some decent damage. I then knocked the snot out of him with over a double attack and then the use of an action point to level him down. I then left him unconscious though he was in a spot to take a close blast but the rest of the group was in a better sweat spot to take the blast and I left him lay there and be rescued by the druid.

I typically follow that rule you do not hit a player while they are down. I have broken that rule once in my campaign.

[Nai_Calus]

If he has been talked to, and has been unrepentant, kick him out. Don't waste time being petty and trying to kill his character, tell him to pack up and leave.

It's possible to have fun as a DM without meatgrinder encounters all day every day, but if it works for you, go ahead. Not my idea of fun, or the idea of fun of people I've enjoyed playing with, but whatever floats your boat. I also disagree with your implication that people who don't like meatgrinders or antagonistic DMing are 'wimps'. Some of us play RPGs for the RP part more so than the G part. For me, combat is the least interesting outcome of a situation, and death is the most boring possible result of failure. On *both* sides of the screen. This doesn't make me a wimp. The DM cackling doesn't make me 'step up my game' any more than I normally do, because I already am bringing my 'best game' to combats. It just makes me roll my eyes and wonder what goofy crap it is this time. XP I never, ever, tell my players that it's 'time to die'. That would entirely defeat the purpose of trying to immerse them in the story.

And again, you're looking at it wrong. Burning Hands is a L1 Wizard Encounter power that's a close blast 5 that does 2d6+mod, half damage on miss, as well, with the same primary stat vs Ref. Close Blast 5 is 25 squares. Is that broken? No. There aren't going to be 25 enemies lined up within that square. You might hit 4 or 5 if there are even that many on the field.

I've played a Monk before, a L1 with SLM. I hit five enemies with it once. Why? We were in a smallish interior room filled with monsters, and my monk was an Elf with a move speed of 7, which was what brought the last two enemies into range in the first place. In fact what makes this a daily isn't so much the ability to hit multiple enemies, it's the strategic positioning/escape it allows for - Which isn't all that much better in the end than an Eladrin's Fey Step(Which does generally one less square of movement, but can be done to a high ledge or while immobilized, and is an encounter power). It's the combination of the multi-hit and the repositioning that makes it shine. It's not broken, and can easily be defeated with enemy positioning or simply having small numbers of enemies. It is in fact very good, but there are times when other L1 Monk dailies are better. Masterful Spiral, for example.

It's fine to not like classes, but don't decry something as broken just because you don't like the class. It may have been broken at one point when it was 3d8+mod, but that was errataed to the current 2d6+mod, and is perfectly fine as-is. The Monk is an awesome class that's fun to play and fun to deal with in encounters. It's not broken or OP, just fun.

[gaming tonic]

Because frankly, if I figured out that my DM hadn't talked to me and had instead just decided to deliberately kill my character, I'd be pissed, and if I didn't leave the group then and there, and wanted to be childish and petty in return, I'd make another, even more ridiculous character just to screw with them. I'd be pissed if it happened to another player.

Also, I seem to be frequently one of the very few DMs that believes this, but I'll let you in on a little DMing secret:
It's OK to let the PCs be awesome. They've invested a lot of their time and effort into their little collection of stats, and it is OK if you don't thwart that at every turn. Similarly, it's not necessary to be an antagonistic DM. As a player, and as a DM for that matter, I've noticed that the more the DM is rubbing their hands and cackling before the fight, the less anyone but the DM enjoys it. Not every battlefield has to be specifically designed to screw the players, not every monster has to be chosen specially to nullify everything they can do.

I agree that whacking any character intentionally unless the player supports it such as in the case of wanting to play a new PC and ensure a dramatic current PC death. Really the character shouldn't be there in the first place. If it was not the right fit for your game that is fine. You are the DM and can do that. In my games I restrict huge chunks of things that might not be appropriate for my campaign/theme.

It is ok to let your PC's be awesome. Let them win an easy one once in awhile. Give them all they can handle in an encounter and let them roar back and win the day. I find that when I am DM'ing this lends itself to everyone having fun. I don't think being antagonistic is the way to go. Cooperative storytelling game is much more fitting than role-playing game and perhaps if originally called that we wouldn't have as many discussions about bad players, DM's, or characters.

[Darth Jerod]

It is all good advice.

I had to tell him he needed to make some major changes to his character and I got a lot of push back until I told him I am not the one complaining at the table about my character, all the problems you have I am trying to address. He did get rid of the multiclassing into Wizard. Took a theme that gave him the one arcane power he wanted and it still fit in with his background.

I had him change his ability scores, even though he pushed back again it got him better defenses but lowered his damage by 1 point, he was willing to go to heaven and highwater to protect that one point.

He so fancy's himself as this great breaker of game systems that is what is frustrating. The reasons he gave for his ability scores not changing is that I will still hit his character anyway so why not put all of his feats into raising Reflex so I have a harder time hitting that. I told him again I am addressing his comments from the table during the game, his pouty face, yes I makes a sad pouty face (it is pathetic really) He gets made fun of by the 10 year old saying he looks like his little brother got told he has to go take a bath. :D

I want him to be happy, but seriously if after these fixes he still complains I will just boot him from my table. The guys running Savage Worlds Deadlands booted him from their game on Monday... it was the first session lol.

Thanks for being critical and giving advice. I might not like reading everything you had to say but it is good to get that perspective.

[Darth Jerod]

Just an update.

Today in my Star Wars campaign, he was down to 6 hit points and went in line of sight of two big bad thugs who one killed him outright. He did not inform me he was low on hit points as the others do, he was upset he was not hitting things or getting the chance to hit anything as he was showboating for the group and looking like he did not know what he was doing.

When I told him the damage total he threw his character sheet at me, when one of the others in the group said he would heal him, he shouted 3 times. He killed me, he killed me, he killed me and shoved his chair back and stood up. The 10 year old said, "I take his disk blade. hey I am trying to ease the tension here." which made the kid storm away from the table.

So the group tried to figure out a way to save him, I was going to offer a solution until I got the character thrown at me. But when the group offered to sacrifice some resources to save him, namely a destiny point I let the kid spend a force point to stay alive.

I then told him that in no uncertain terms would I ever allow him to throw a tantrum at my table again. Players at the table sent me tweets saying he looked about to cry. This was technically the 1st full session of playing characters, I felt bad but getting a reaction like that was uncalled for.

I told him if he does it again I will ask him not to come back to any games. To be fair I kept trying to have the bad guys kill off the NPC's the group had with them he just kept muscling in on the action and becoming the target. He left soon after the we ended which was 10 min or so later. I send him an email telling him to call me if he had questions and the ball is in his court.

Just when things were getting better as well.

That is just the kind of reaction and behavior they all agreed on at the beginning of me setting up a campaign would not happen. When the 10 year old has to remind him of this I have to agree issues in the past or not he did not tolerate another player doing the same thing when he got hurt. He needs to remember that.