I have a player who obviously enjoys the game, but recently behaved recklessly, presumably out of a desire to "get things going" or "just do something".  When confronted with a series of dangerous challenges he made rash choices and leaped forward when it would have been wiser to think first and then move.  

For example, they found four sets of mushrooms in a cave occupied by fey, whom they briefly encountered.   The mushrooms were determined to be magical by the cleric, who gave the warning that they might be "good or bad", but he couldn't tell.  Without any ado he pops a shroom and swallows it.  

It might have been poisonous.  It might have turned him into an eel.  It might have made him shrunk to the size of a pin head, or grow horns.   Yet, and I gather this is an instinct born by playing video games, he assumed that if he finds something it must be for his character to use, and so he ate it.  

This set up a certain kind of challenge for Gamesmasters - when some players act like they are in a video game and every time they find something they just pop it open like it's a "health pill" - there specifically to super charge their character.   Now I could have just rolled and on a four let him be poisoned, which would have been fair.  However, it would have also, I know, spoiled the game, possibly for him, but moreover for the others who would then have to wait while he rolls up a new character.   In a limited game-time setting that was not really so great an option.   In this case he didn't get poisoned, but instead was polymorphed into a kobold, however it raised the issue when I noticed that he was playing somewhat recklessly.

My question is - how do you guys handle reckless players?

I embrace them. They make things happen!

And I try to shape it so that if the consequences of the reckless action kill them off, it's only the reckless PC!

Quote from: Kyle AaronI embrace them. They make things happen!

And I try to shape it so that if the consequences of the reckless action kill them off, it's only the reckless PC!

I agree.  That's the rub.  The guy made the adventure advance much more rapidly than it would have otherwise and added excitement and risk to the game.  That's cool, I agree.  Definitely.  Now since we're dealing with magic and the fey in this case I have, in my estimation, a certain amount of flexability in terms of magical outcomes.   On the other hand if the same recklessness were employed for a physical fight - the dice rule (in my game they do) and there'd be nothing but to roll the new character.

I'm curious though, when you say that you'd try to shape the consequences so it's only the reckless PC and not, I presume, the player.   But players often become attached to their characters.   Or in a starting group you get the situation where they don't know the world well and you as GM have the feeling that if they make mistakes and get killed they'll think the world is too tough and give up.   So what kind of things do you do to shape the consequences that way?   I'd love to get a couple of examples!  


Mark

Quote from: VBWyrdeMy question is - how do you guys handle reckless players?

Unforgivingly. Sometimes I turn to solutions like yours - penalize them without penalizing the other players - but usually I'll just give them whatever they've earned, whether that's super strength [which I don't think I'd ever have a mushroom give someone, but okay] or a lingering, pointless death by poison.

Since few fungal poisons are instantly deadly, in this situation, I'd let him eat it and have nothing happen. A few minutes later, he could start getting dizzy, sweating a little too much. Then dryness in his mouth, all just mentioned fairly casually, and without reference to the mushroom. Cramps. He stops sweating. He starts racking up modifiers. Sometime before he passes out, he realizes, "Shit, it was that stupid mushroom I didn't think did anything!" And then you get to say, "Maybe you shouldn't just pop random shit in your mouth, then. Children know that."

Quote from: VBWyrdeI'm curious though, when you say that you'd try to shape the consequences so it's only the reckless PC and not, I presume, the player.   But players often become attached to their characters.  

If you're attached to your character, you shouldn't be reckless with them. We're all grown-ups here, I mean come on. You roll the dice and take your chances - but it's up to you as the player whether you roll the dice a few times or fifty times, and whether you roll them against your best skill with a brilliant plan or your worst skill with no plan.

Quote from: VBWyrdeSo what kind of things do you do to shape the consequences that way?   I'd love to get a couple of examples!  

I make my NPCs less crazy than the PCs, and if a PC is controlling something the whole party's in (like a spaceship) the others will have time to interfere...

With the NPCs, if one PC offends or attacks them they don't automatically assume the other PCs are keen to join in, and if they do, they try to hold them off rather than wipe them out. My NPCs rarely have the specific goal of wiping out the party or even one member, they have some other goal which the PCs may or may not oppose, so that the PCs may decide to make themselves an obstacle to the NPCs' plans.

Example: the PCs were sent to bring Robert, pretender to the Eorldom of the land, back from the hills. One, basically a rogue, had been told by his liege lord that he'd really rather Robert not come back - he took that to mean, "kill him!" The rogue tried to persuade the others, "let's kill Robert and his two servants!" but they wouldn't go along with murder. Then he focused on the servants, who happened to be outlaws in the land. The other PCs still wouldn't go along, saying "um, if we kill his servants surely he'll be curious why? And may take arms against us?" This was of course the rogue's idea.

So he walked away from this conversation happening in the middle of the night and decided to sneak away, trying not to be seen, and slay the servants. He slew one, the butchery waking the other who fled. Now facing him one-on-one, both conscious and armed, he didn't like his odds. Then Robert awoke and appeared with his sword.

They rested and recovered from their wounds and then in the morning Robert asked why the rogue had slain his servants. The rogue replied it was because they were murderous outlaws (oh, the irony!) and anyway Robert was a goat-fucking highlander. Robert warned him not to speak to him thus, and the rogue continued. Shiiiiick! Out came the sword, and a chase happened. I pointed out that with his superiority agility, the rogue could scramble through the rocks in the hills and lose Robert. But he chose to stand and fight, and was knocked down.

Robert put his sword to the rogue's belly, and said, "Swear by Tiw fealty to me, and you shall live." I figured that a rogue would say "sure", then as soon as the guy turned around, stab! But:- "I'd rather die than serve a goat-fucker like you!"

Stab.

The other PCs raised arms to Robert now in revenge, but he talked them down, saying that the rogue was obviously a treacherous murderer, but that he had no quarrel with them. With the dead rogue lying by them as an example, they stood down.

I could have played Robert as angry and vengeful, and then we might have had a TPK. But I decided that unlike the rogue PC, he wasn't insane, so...:cool:

But I thought it was great that he'd been insane. Now Robert had an excuse to return to the highlands and come down to the lowlands with a heap of highland warriors as his "personal guard". Which led in the end to a big battle deciding the fate of the whole eorldom, and a chance for the PCs to sway it one way or the other by their actions.

So the PC's stupid recklessness killed him, but didn't directly harm the party, and drove events forward very quickly. There was lots of stuff like that, it just meant that the campaign ended after 12 sessions instead of 18... Reckless stupidity resolves things more quickly than intelligent planning :haw:

You could let them drink a potion (because you know now that if it's there, they'll drink it which turns them into a toad for some amount of time.  It doesn't permanently take them out of the game - - but it does take them out of making decisions and "getting things done" for a while.  "Lose a Turn" instead of "Out of the Game".

If they like making decisions and not losing a turn, they'll start being more cautious.

Quote from: EngineUnforgivingly. Sometimes I turn to solutions like yours - penalize them without penalizing the other players - but usually I'll just give them whatever they've earned, whether that's super strength [which I don't think I'd ever have a mushroom give someone, but okay] or a lingering, pointless death by poison.

Since few fungal poisons are instantly deadly, in this situation, I'd let him eat it and have nothing happen. A few minutes later, he could start getting dizzy, sweating a little too much. Then dryness in his mouth, all just mentioned fairly casually, and without reference to the mushroom. Cramps. He stops sweating. He starts racking up modifiers. Sometime before he passes out, he realizes, "Shit, it was that stupid mushroom I didn't think did anything!" And then you get to say, "Maybe you shouldn't just pop random shit in your mouth, then. Children know that."

*chuckle*... yeah, I hear ya.   I'm tempted to do the same, and probably will the next time.   What's funny is that there *was* one mushroom that he ate that didn't do anything...

The adventure, actually can be read here:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/LRPGSW/message/1751

I should say, the character in question didn't behave recklessly the entire time.  He did make some good decisions along the way.  I should also add that he actually has the minimal Wisdom Requisite, though I honestly don't think that was part of the rational for his decisions.  

Overall, I tend to agree with your approach.   As a player it stings to lose a character due to reckless behavior - but it engeders more respect for the world in the long run, and I think that's more important.

Quote from: StuartYou could let them drink a potion (because you know now that if it's there, they'll drink it which turns them into a toad for some amount of time.  It doesn't permanently take them out of the game - - but it does take them out of making decisions and "getting things done" for a while.  "Lose a Turn" instead of "Out of the Game".

If they like making decisions and not losing a turn, they'll start being more cautious.

Actually this character kept poping mushrooms and jumping into the magical pool.  So he got consecutively turned into ... a Kobold, a goldfish, a winged goldfish, a wolf, and then back to a human, then a wolf, and finally back to a human.   He's almost out of restoration mushrooms though... hehe.

Quote from: Kyle AaronIf you're attached to your character, you shouldn't be reckless with them. We're all grown-ups here, I mean come on. You roll the dice and take your chances - but it's up to you as the player whether you roll the dice a few times or fifty times, and whether you roll them against your best skill with a brilliant plan or your worst skill with no plan.

Quite true, generally.

Also... Awesome.   Great example of what you mean!   I think I can get my mind wrapped around the general idea and go with that.   Good call!   Thanks!

Reckless players are bored attention whores.  Bitchslap the offender, ignore him and deal with the sensible folks until the errant one repents and reforms.

The adventure so far (take from game test IV forward):

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/LRPGSW/message/1751

You'll notice it left off at a cliff hanger - how will they escape?  Vespasian has vanished, and now William is in a vastly deep and happy slumber... I have some ideas on where I might go from here next game, but I'd be curious to hear any ideas you may care to offer...

The reckless player, in case you couldn't tell, is Fred, the Mushroom devouring shape shifter...


Thanks!

I get a little irritated with these so-called reckless players. If it's part of their character personalities I'm fine with it. But if it's something to do with how the player views the pace of the game - if it's moving too slow for him/her or the player wants to "spice" things up - I don't really entertain them. I don't have much experience with such players, those who have exhibited such behaviour normally do so because of the reasons I mentioned and we resolve whatever issues they may have during our post game discussions.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David Rif it's moving too slow for him/her or the player wants to "spice" things up - I don't real--

Alright chums, let's do this! LEEROY JENKINS! :haw:

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerReckless players are bored attention whores.  Bitchslap the offender, ignore him and deal with the sensible folks until the errant one repents and reforms.

One way to look at it. But what a bored attention whore is also doing is showing enthusiasm. Enthusiasm should be rewarded with some sort of results - even bad results - unless you wish to discourage enthusiasm.

Of course, you have to control their tendency to dominate the game session. That's part of a GM's job, to make sure that each players gets to particiipate as much as they're comfortable with. That's why we hate it when they split the party, makes it heaps harder.

Luckily, you can balance these things. So the reckless player or bored attention whore says, "I run over to the controls, and look for the big red button! I press it!"
The GM says, "Rest of group, you see him running over to the controls and looking for something, what could he be doing do you think?"

So everyone gets a chance to participate, no slap-down needed :cool:

Quote from: Kyle AaronThe GM says, "Rest of group, you see him running over to the controls and looking for something, what could he be doing do you think?"

So everyone gets a chance to participate, no slap-down needed :cool:

Yes.  That's good.  I am adding that to my little black book of Good GMing Tips.