Scene: the party are making a plan and everyone is agreed. Everyone, that is, except one player. It’s the one player who insists on going in a different direction. Almost every. Single. Time. This is a moment so many GMs experience. To be clear, this article isn’t about solo play or one-on-one games. I’ve had a lot of fun and some brilliant moments with those. However, here I’m focusing on disruptive lone wolf players within a group. It’s a look at why it can happen, and ways to deal with it, in-world and player-to-player.
All Wolves Are Not The Same
Many of the desires to play a lone wolf come from the same source. It may seem obvious, but to be clear, the player wants to be different. However, within this can come very different motivations. This is important to consider because it changes how to deal with the issue, if it’s an issue at all.
The one I’ve encountered the most is the player committed to a stubbornly independent concept. This is the dark and mysterious rogue, the brooder, the wanderer, the edgiest of edgelords. That said, I’ve also found lone wolves in play because the player themselves has checked out; they’re not invested in the party’s quest, any overall narrative, or the world at large. Here, being a lone wolf is more symptom than cause.
Then there are new players who believe a lone wolf character offers safety. By limiting the connection to the party and the game world, they don’t need to ask as many questions; there’s less chance of them making a mistake or a social faux pas as they learn the game. New players may see it as a form of security as they explore this brave new world of a hobby.
I’ve also encountered players that have simply disagreed with the party’s plan so much, neither side can reconcile. Unlike the other types of lone wolves, these tend to surface during moments of an adventure, not throughout. In some ways, this makes it a lot easier to deal with.
This list isn’t exhaustive; I’m sure there are more than the ones I’ve encountered. However, hopefully it should be clear these players are acting on very different motivations. This means there is no quick-fix, one-size-fits-all solution. Treating them all the same would be a mistake.
Systemic Help for a Lone Wolf
Lone wolves are often more problematic in some systems than others. For instance, characters in Pathfinder (either edition), and D&D 5e/5.5 are quite durable. This lets players build more independent PCs, and there’s less consequence for splitting the party.
The trade-off is a loss in lethality. One of the near-universal traits in players across the hobby is a desire to protect their characters above all else. This is often powerful enough to override the lone wolf impulse. OSR games like Shadowdark and Pirate Borg have no problem killing a PC in a few hits.
Consequently, discussion and compromise are quietly encouraged over walking away from the party. Lone wolves don’t just face higher chances of failure, their odds of survival plummet.
These systems encourage cooperation over individual action in others ways, too.
Very limited inventory slots pressure the party to work as a team. No one can carry everything. In Shadowdark, this is encouraged further with torches burning out in real time. When the light goes out, the party fight at disadvantage—no darkvision here—and the dungeon gets more dangerous.
Alone in the dark, no one survives for long.
Safety in Numbers
Reaction rolls can be another mechanical nudge towards teamwork. If players know encounters can be handled socially, avoiding particularly costly combats plays on that player instinct for self-preservation.
There are various flavours of this mechanic. Usually, the GM rolls a d6 or 2d6 to randomly determine a group’s response to the PC or party. The results initially set the creatures as fully hostile, suspicious, cautiously friendly, in need of help, or very friendly. This adds variety and unexpected opportunities, pushing the adventure in surprising directions while making room for more player creativity.
However, smarter versions also factor in things like the PC’s charisma and the party’s previous interactions with the creatures; if the party have been merrily slaughtering goblins, a goblin encounter is much more likely to be immediately hostile; conversely, some kobolds who rival those same goblins may now be friendlier—the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Part of the beauty of reaction rolls is how easy they are to hack. Situational bonuses are very easy to add in. Consider, for example, the group deciding PCs on their own will seem easier targets for opportunistic creatures. Our group of goblins may have an equal chance of being hostile, suspicious, curious, or friendly to a full strength party. However, a single PC, all alone is a very different matter. The chances of an attack go up if the goblins sense the chance for an easy, quick kill.
Steal from Other Systems!
Incidentally, although reaction rolls are more associated with OSR systems, they’re very easy to port into D&D or Pathfinder. In those games, encounter difficulty is often more affected by enemy numbers than their actual threat level. Anyone who’s played Curse of Strahd will know this; eight Crawling Hands are way more dangerous to a party without the Sleep spell than a single Dire Wolf.
Presenting the party with odds of being greatly outnumbered when alone, even in these more heroic systems, will give some players pause.
In-World Ideas for Dealing with a Lone Wolf
Outnumbering the PC or PCs is one element of encounter design that can work. Building encounters that require coordinated effort is a less punishing alternative. A classic example is floor tiles that need PCs to be standing on all of them at the same time; give the party tasks and situations that cannot be solved easily, if at all, by one member.
For instance, a demonic ritual has multiple anchor points that need disrupting at the same time; failing to do so makes them stronger or advances the ritual. Another alternative is a burning building with people inside, spread throughout; a lone wolf may be able to save one or two, but the party can save them all.
Another option is to use NPCs and factions to nudge the lone wolf back towards the party. A hostile faction may look for any chance to target the PC if they’re alone. A faction offering a great reward may set the PC a task they cannot complete alone, or one that requires the skill sets of the other characters. Alternatively, a faction or factions each give a different PC important information that only makes sense combined.
Some NPCs may only open up to certain character classes or professions. For example, an old war chief may distrust all rogues, but appreciate fighters. A high-flying celebrity may have no time for detectives or soldiers, but have great need of an accountant.
This Isn’t a Beat Stick
The objective isn’t to punish the player. It’s to present realistic consequences for taking heightened risks in a dangerous world. For some, this might amount to the same thing. However, I’d pitch there’s one big difference: the world acts reasonably, not automatically punitively.
By this, I mean the lone wolf should have the risks foreshadowed or directly communicated before they take the action. At the same time, the situations are not certain to kill the character. Some clever thinking or lucky rolls may see them survive. But, without fail, it should be clear things would have been easier and/or safer if the party had acted together.
In fact, occasionally it might even be worth giving the lone wolf a chance to shine. Some players are naturally more independent, and punishing them for their nature is wrong. There may be opportunities to satisfy the lone wolf urge that benefits the group. Sometimes offer them the chance to scout or handle a negotiation.
Some systems give classes that can expressly satisfy this role, like Cyberpunk Red’s netrunners. Previous iterations of the game actually handled this character clumsily; the rest of the table would sit and twiddle their thumbs while the netrunner hacked a system.
Red changed this by integrating hacking directly into the action; while the rest of the party are infiltrating a building, the netrunner uses their turn to help with obstacles and threats in the party’s way. The player gets to use a unique skillset in a distinctive gameplay loop; however, it’s all working within a framework promoting coordination and teamwork.
Out-of-Game Solutions for a Lone Wolf
Really, this should be the first thing the table should try with any serious problem. Prevention is better than cure in most cases, and lone wolves are what a session zero is primed to stop. Setting cooperative play as the expected default makes things clear from the beginning; it also gives a useful point of reference going forwards if gameplay is going off the rails.
Seth Skorkowsky made this great video highlighting session zeroes never really stop. By that, he means open communication at the table should be ongoing. As a group or one-on-one, checking in over what is fun and not fun should be a matter of course. Open and free communication will short-circuit a lot problems before they develop. (Incidentally, Seth was kind enough to do an interview for us; you can find it here.)
The Harder Conversations
It may also lead to some uncomfortable conversations.
Most tabletop roleplaying games are group games. Not to belabour the point too much, but those two words, group and game, need a certain attitude. Namely, have fun, and make sure that does not come at the expense of other people feeling good.
Sometimes the social side of the table can hit bumpy moments and keep moving; an insensitive word or badly timed action can often slide by between friends. However, long-term issues like lone wolves hurting everyone else’s fun—and that last part is important—may require direct action.
The conversation isn’t an attack. And it doesn’t have to be the GM taking on the responsibility; a group game is, after all, a group responsibility. But it’s worth pointing out people are sometimes very bad at reading each other.
Boardgames dodge this problem most of the time by having a very fixed game loop and ruleset to abide by. TTRPGs’p reliance on people’s imagination is simultaneously one of its strongest points, and one of its weaknesses. People aren’t always imagining the same thing at the table; they’re almost certainly focusing on different details.
This can lead to honest mistakes and misreads. People might not be realising they’re making other people uncomfortable; here, a quiet word might be all that’s needed to get everyone back on the same page. Other times, given a chance to share their perspective, the player might highlight very real issues with other members’ approaches at the table. It’s important to lead with an open mind and willingness to compromise.
Reframe or Evolve
Specific advice for lone wolves: one option is to give the player the opportunity to reframe their character concept. For instance, a dark and brooding rogue adjusts, brooding only occasionally at certain times—perhaps during feasts or watching campfires. Perhaps they may be reserved during social encounters, but when combat hits, they will not hesitate to defend their allies.
Another alternative is to rapidly evolve the character. Yes, our dark and brooding rogue was committed to the concept of an anti-hero; they had a backstory that is long and tragic. However, having fought alongside their allies, and spent so much time with them, they have changed their point of view; these are people they now feel they can support; these are people they can rely on.
Reframing and rapidly evolving a character are two quick responses to the lone wolf when it’s a problem. Setting some hard limits or triggers everyone can work around can work well with everyone compromising. It’s not erasing the initial concept the player really liked, it’s adjusting it.
Lean into the Lone Wolf
As mentioned, giving character classes or scenarios for the lone wolf to satisfy their impulse can also work. If it genuinely gives them enjoyment, and doesn’t hurt the table’s fun, then opening opportunities to enable it can work.
Downtime projects and domain side events can work as opportunities for the player to safely break away from others and express themselves. These short, sharp bursts of independent play give the player the spotlight and the chance for solo activities. This might be a research project, a crafting process, or some social set-up. Each time the party come back from an adventure, the project can progress.
Significantly, this doesn’t interfere with the flow of play; in fact, the other players might be all doing their own thing, too.
Only Isn’t Always Lonely
Another option is to go really deep. In this case, the player may want to play a solo game or one-on-one with a GM. These events, even the one-on-one adventures, may not have any impact on the group’s adventure; in fact, it’s likely better they don’t to avoid any weird imbalance with knowledge and influence. The goal here is to vent the lone wolf urge, so the player feels more open to compromise during the group’s game. It’s definitely not the best option in my book, but it’s certainly a possibility. Besides, more gaming is always a good thing!
A lot of this will come down to table tolerance. What a player insistent on lone wolf play feels, as well as the GM and any other player at the table. Some groups will be fine with one player taking up more of the spotlight or doing their own thing. Others will be much less enthusiastic. Again, it comes down to open and clear communication on what people enjoy, and doing that without crushing other people’s fun.
Ends and New Beginnings
There will be times when a group just isn’t meant to be or runs its natural course. I’ve mentioned it before, but one of my groups had a player who loved spontaneous storycraft and inter-party conflict; another loved teamwork, wanted to crush combat encounters, and play out an epic grand narrative; the last player repeatedly built level one characters, and had their road to level 20 all planned out; this included specific story beats and moments they wanted to play out no matter what.
The group powered through two campaigns, one a year long, the other two and a half. I think that counts as a fair attempt to make it work. Ultimately, though, we agreed video games were a much less stressful, much healthier reason for us to get together.
Sometimes the mix of personalities or preferences for play just doesn’t work. And that’s okay. Other systems, other tables, or even other hobbies may build healthier relationships. Being comfortable to walk away from an unworkable situation helps longer term happiness. That group I mentioned still meets up once a month for video gaming, and the friendships are stronger for it.
Open and Honest Wins
In some ways, the lone wolf problem isn’t really a character concept or even a system issue. It’s a communication issue. Sure, systems like those in the OSR can push players to be more cooperative. And yes, GMs can build situations and encounters to dissuade or satisfy lone wolf play. However, I would recommend using session zeroes and checking-in sessions thereafter.
That keeps everyone on the same page, and reduces instances of miscommunication and mounting grievances. More fun and less stress longer term are worth a few potentially awkward conversations early on. Treat everyone like an adult and they will—hopefully—respond in kind!
