Working with players

[thanatos]

I'm so proud of my players! I've mentioned in a couple of other threads that the zombies have been winning every game since we started playing (we had only played about 4 games at that point). Over the weekend, the heroes won their first scenario, and they are now on a four-game winning streak.

I've become the resident "ZM," as the other players tend to prefer playing heroes (and preferred it even when the zombies were winning every time...my players like a challenge). At first, I was ZMing with my wife, but she has since gone living.

The heroes' first victory came on the Burn 'em Out scenario thanks to a mistake I made as the ZM, and that's the game I want to talk about, but I'll get into it in a moment. The other three victories came when one of our heroes had to drop out and my partner in ZMing went hero, leading to a victory in Die, Zombie, Die, and 2 victories in Flying Frog's web scenario, All Hallow's Eve.

It's my heroes' first victory that I wanted to get some advice on. I mentioned my being the "ZM," and I really am approaching the game that way - trying to turn it into a miniature, light-hearted RPG (even down to inserting funny dialogue when the heroes failed their interrogations in All Hallows Eve, such as Jeb saying, "Neckernomicon? Nah, but I gots me a neckerchief."), and I'm doing it in such a way that the players are driving the experience (I've had some heavy-handed DMs in my day - did not like), but even so, I'm running into some of the same issues I've seen DMs run into in more traditional pen-and-paper RPGs.

I'll give a bit of a play-by-play of our "Burn 'Em Out" game: the heroes were doing fairly well - they started with Jenny, Becky, Sheriff Anderson, and Jake (we don't have Growing Hunger, so we're limited to core characters and scenarios). Player 1 ran the ladies, player 2 the men.

Jake got a gas can and made it to a spawning pit fairly early in the scenario, but died on the turn after he destroyed the pit.

Jenny got the other gas can and hightailed it across the map, but she was already wounded and lost another fight while attempting to blow the pit, so she dropped the gas at the pit.

Becky picked up TNT and tried to make it to a nearby spawning pit, but had the misfortune of a trifecta of bad effects played on her: Haunted by the Past, I Don't Trust 'Em, and Overconfidence, effectively trapping her at the door to the Plant spawning pit, unable to search and unable to go anywhere else.

Here is where the player problem came in. Player 2 brought the Sheriff into the same space as Becky to defend her, and they both managed to get through the door of the Plant, but there was a large enough horde spawned (or moving that way) that they could get no further. Since I wanted to see a hero victory, I mentioned to the heroes that time was counting down (although I think there were 10 turns left at this point), and it might be a better idea for the Sherrif to run across the board to the gas can that Jenny had dropped so he could take out a pit for himself. Player 2 decided, instead, to take control of both his and player 1's heroes and wasted 7 turns milling hero cards trying to get the other dynamite for himself. Player 1 was getting visibly upset at being told how to play his turn each time.

Finally, with 3 turns left before the heroes lost the game, Player 2 made a break for it (they had managed to destroy Overconfidence to get Becky to her spawning pit). Player 2 managed two amazing rolls (a six and a five), taking him clear across the board to the spawning pit where Jenny died, and he was able to sacrifice his last turn to destroy the pit. I have a bad habit of playing with my Zombie cards face-down, so I forgot that I had Locked Door in my hand. Thanks to Player 2's attempts at controlling his fellow hero, he would have cost them the victory if I had actually remembered what was in my hand, as all it would have taken would have been slamming a single door in his face and he would have been out of time. Had Player 2 not been a problem in the scenario, I probably would have "fudged the dice," so to speak, and just let him through the door even if I had remembered that I had the card, but because of the way he was trying to over-rule everything Player 1 wanted to do, I REALLY regret my forgetting that I had the Locked Door card, because it would have given me altogether too much satisfaction to have slammed the door in his face after such a perfect roll just to make him lose because he did not move sooner.

The problem in the scenario was not, of course, that the heroes ignored my advice (although I mentioned several more times that time was running out to try to get him moving). They're free to play as they want to play. The problem came from the fact that this particular player has that bit of hubris that sometimes makes it difficult to play games with a person - namely the conceit that he always knows the best strategy, and it very nearly ruined that playthrough for Player 1 (not the game as a whole - he's addicted hook, line, and sinker). When they had dealt with Overconfidence, Player 2 still tried to make Player 1 mill with Becky for several more turns, and Player 1 acquiesced simply to keep from causing a fight in my house, but his face was getting darker every turn that player 2 tried to impose his will.

In our previous games, much the same issue had occurred - whenever player 2 came up with any sort of strategy, he did not think to discuss it with player 1, he simply commanded player 1 to do X. As I mentioned, before that last game, they had lost every single game. Had I remembered what was in my hand, they would have lost the Burn 'Em Out scenario, too.

The next night we played, my partner in Zombies took over Player 2's vacated hero seat and actually worked cooperatively with Player 1, rather than trying to control him. They were downright devious, discussing strategies back and forth, countering my ploys, and using all their heroes to the fullest, and they played a beautiful game. I don't think they lost a single hero in DZD OR in All Hallow's Eve. More importantly, we all had fun. The next night we played Player 2 was back, but he bowed out because he had an early day the next day, and, again, we had an absolute blast playing another round of All Hallow's Eve, which the heroes managed to win with 2 turns remaining (this time they were pushing the whole time, not just pointlessly milling)

My dilemma is this: in a normal gaming group, we could simply disinvite Player 2, but he happens to be my roommate, which means disinviting him could be awkward, given that he will usually be present on game nights. I've never really DM'ed before, and in those pen-and-paper RPGs I've played where a player has tried to hijack the game, the DM can usually punish the player subtly by either making more monsters target him, fudging dice rolls against him, or otherwise "tweaking" things invisibly. Had I remembered my cards, of course, I could have very easily punished Player 2, but I would have had no other option "in-game" to do so. What is the best way, in your experience, to go about dealing with a player like this outside of kicking him out of the group entirely?

[mqstout]

You remind me that one of my players (sadly recently moved away) always seemed to blow himself up with dynamite or "See you in hell!" nearly every game.

Anyway, as a long-time GM, some advice:
* First, talk to the other players. Do they feel the same as you do? If not, maybe there really isn't a problem.
* Secondly, talk to the person having the problem. Be frank. Hell, even hand him a print of your post. Sometimes people don't realize it. One person I play with does do that annoying "control other player's turns" thing with "advice". He's aware of it at the grand scale, but sometimes he forgets during play. I just have to remind him subtly that he's "doing it again".
* Try rotating around the role of zombie player. This might give him an alternate perspective.
* Hosting at your place with the room mate being the problem is another issue altogether. You could try hosing elsewhere, or even publicly.

[thanatos]

Thanks for the advice!

Since we had one night where the player was not present, the other two players spent a goodly amount of time before AND after the game venting about his behavior (unprompted by me, and not done during the game) - of course, this was after he randomly called up and asked if he could bring two strangers to join in the game since the bar they wanted to visit was closed (one of our other players is very uncomfortable around people he doesn't know. Given that the absent player is the one who introduced US to this other player, he knows this all too well, and even warned us about it when he introduced us) - it's possible the conversation wouldn't have veered toward him at all if it hadn't been for that.

When we were still learning, we cycled heroes and zombies a couple of times, but with the same pairings (my wife and I as heroes, Players 1 and 2 as zombies)...if anything, I think he was even more controlling as part of a two-person zombie team, but we all thought making him play zombies next time would be a good idea, as it would give him the opportunity to see what happens when the heroes cooperate rather than coopt.

At this point, given that the issue occurred several days ago, I may sit quiet for one more game to see what happens - after teaming to such great effect with my wife, our other player may just refuse to be ordered around, but if not, I will definitely confront the issue, because I want everyone to enjoy themselves as much as possible - after all, what's the point of playing a game if you're not having fun?

[munkymuddface]

If you have a total of 3 or 5 players, you could have "Player 2" play as the Zombies by himself vs everyone else as a team. Not sure what to suggest for 4 or 6 players short of bringing it to his attention...

[thanatos]

I figure with four players total (counting me), we can just have one of the hero players field two heroes. I could always run zombies with him, but that gives him a convenient excuse for the loss (I didn't do what he wanted) rather than forcing him to face the fact that coop, rather than coopt, allows the heroes to win.

[atramagus]

(07-06-2011 12:46 AM)thanatos Wrote:  I figure with four players total (counting me), we can just have one of the hero players field two heroes. I could always run zombies with him, but that gives him a convenient excuse for the loss (I didn't do what he wanted) rather than forcing him to face the fact that coop, rather than coopt, allows the heroes to win.

The only problem with that thought is that you're essentially giving him double the resources of the other players. If the players manage to win, he'll probably still take the credit (from what you've said about him), saying that the only reason the heroes were able to win is because he was doing all the work. That still won't engender good feelings in the group.

Just me 2 cents.

[ForestRunner]

Long time RPG'er here. I know everyone is different, but I basically NOW have a zero tolerance for problem players. Players insistent on being power gamers or centre of attention, just simply do not change their stripes. I personally will never cajole a problem player again, because there is always the risk other players in the group may want out.

It's even stated in this particular case, the remainder of group vented about the particular individual. In short, everyone in the group is suffering for it.

It's only a game (ok, ducks for cover!!), but ultimately it should be fun for all. Last point in the second post of the thread could be worth at least considering.

[thanatos]

Strangely enough, the problem player has not been involved in our games since that problematic game thanks to his making some new friends and spending most of his evenings hanging out with them playing Munchkin and Arkham Horror. The other two players have done a very good job of bonding and building up good cooperative strategies, so I have a feeling that if he tries to cause problems on his eventual return, I'll have plenty of backup for shutting him down hard and fast.

[samuraitrev]

Hi Thantos this is an interesting thread. It's probably a good thing that this dude doesn't game with your group anymore because after all the most important thing is the spirit of the game not who wins.

Happy gaming

[thanatos]

Couldn't agree more, Trev! My biggest goal is for everyone to have fun when we're playing. The player in question returned last night, and I stuck him on my side of the board helping me run zombies, which seemed to work better. He didn't try to steamroll things (possibly because he knows me well enough to know I don't steamroll easy) and he got to see just how effective a cooperating hero team can be.

We'll see if he tries to rejoin the game more often or not - I'm just glad his attitude was better last night.