Problem player

[Censored69]

So uh, the short version. I'm DMing a game of pathfinder and we have a bully in the group.
Longer version: I started running a basic fantasy game of pathfinder about a month ago. We have two players, I'm calling them Bob and Joe for the sake of this post. Bob is our problem player. He tries to manipulate the other players and when that doesn't work he insults and threatens them until they eventually give up do whatever he wants. Then we have Joe, the only member of the group willing to continue to stand up to him. Of course this irritates Bob to no end. I've tried to avoid intervening too much so far as I figured it was up to the players to figure this out. I'm starting to get tired of his crap though and I recently found out that since Bob can't convert Joe to his cause Bob has decided to kill Joe's PC. The whole situation has become very soap opera-ish.

When the problem first cropped up I tried talking to Bob who actually tried to defend his mistreatment of the other party members, saying it was within his True Neutral alignment. I once again tried talking to him and he straight up refused to listen. At this point I'm not really sure how to take care of the problem other than asking Bob to leave the group. I'm getting complaints from all the other players and honestly I've never had this much drama in a game before....

[comicshorse]

Some times the simplest answer is the right answer. You've tried to talk to this guy twice about it and he's refused to do anything about it. He's obviously ruining the game for the other players and it doesn't sound like you're enjoying it anymore.
It does seem to be him or everybody else. So make it him.

[Reluctance]

Really, what were you expecting people to say? When someone is a stubborn trainwreck, there's not really anything else you can do.

[LemuneSD]

If you are reluctant to ask him to leave the group, maybe explaining one last time that the point of this game is for the GROUP, not one individual, to have fun. He is causing stress within the group, and that is NOT what most people set aside time for.
If one player is bringing down the rest of the group, as the host (GM) it is within your right to ask him to either do something about it, or you will. I think you're gonna have to play the stern authority figure =D

Edit: If reasoning fails, just inform him that he has been voted off of the Island.

[tensai_oni]

If you are reluctant to ask him to leave the group, maybe explaining one last time that the point of this game is for the GROUP, not one individual, to have fun.

I wouldn't use this exact phrasing, because it opens a can of worms when someone could say that one player should be willing to sacrifice their fun for the whole group. I'd rather say that he should still be able to have fun while not putting the rest down.

But I don't think he deserves this benevolence anymore. Just tell him that if he doesn't straighten his act, he should leave. If he doesn't agree, tell him to leave. If he agrees but then acts like a jerk anyway, tell him to leave too.

[Reluctance]

If you are reluctant to ask him to leave the group, maybe explaining one last time that the point of this game is for the GROUP, not one individual, to have fun. He is causing stress within the group, and that is NOT what most people set aside time for.

Read between the lines. Bob tries to use "it's what my character would do!" as a shield. He's planning on turning player personality conflicts into in-game smackdowns. And of course he flat-out refused to listen when OP tried to talk things through. I can't pinpoint his exact motives, but I can say for certain that it's not something misguided yet well-meaning.

DTMFA. Sometimes that really is all there is to it.

[LemuneSD]

Read between the lines.

Personally, I'd have no problem tossing the chakaar out on the streets. But the point is that Censored here is obviously trying to find an alternate method than 'gtfo'. If he wanted Bob to leave and that was that, he wouldn't have put up this post. He knows Bob will put up a conflict. I think you read between lines that weren't there xD

[Crossblade]

Inform him that you have decided to not allow Player Killing in your game as it would ruin Joe's fun. If he brings up the "it's what my character would do", retort with:
No, that's what an evil character would do.
and
This decision is what the Dungeon Master will do. Use third person for this.


If he does not like this, inform him that no one is forcing him to play in a game with a Dungeon Master decision that he does not like, also add again that the Dungeon Master doesn't like the bullying at the sessions; neither do the other party members.



Or just tell him to stop or you'll kick his bum out.

[Need_A_Life]

In no particular order.

Option 1: Tell him to leave
Notes: If you expect such a confrontation to escalate to a physical one, don't do it alone.

Option 2: Talk to him
Notes: Whether it's better done alone or in the presence of the rest of the group depends on his and your personalities. If it won't put him on the defensive, having the rest of the group explain that he's being a [swear] and that you're all enjoying the game less because of him, that might get him to stop.

Option 3: Evil-tag
Notes: Some players will moderate behaviour greatly if they get slapped with an evil alignment, even if that's all that happened.

Option 4: End the campaign
Notes: If confronting this problem will be more of a bother than ending the campaign (and, depending on circumstances, dissolving the group, even temporarily), you could simply do that. Then, when starting another campaign, simply invite the people you like playing with.

[Jay R]

You're right. There may be some solution besides Bob leaving the game. But for such a solution to work, Bob has to be invested in it.

Tell him that he's taken everybody else's fun away, and that he needs to leave the game.

Then listen to whatever he says next. If he won't change his behavior, that should be clear in the next three minutes. If he will, then let him propose an alternate solution.

[Vknight]

What has already been stated is your best options.

Talked to him twice.
Give him a third chance.
Since this is in character bullying and tendencies evil alignment can also work
Just tell him he's ruining the game for others and that its a group event that though you shouldn't sacrifice your own fun for others it does not mean you should put your fun before theirs.

[Sylvre Phire]

Given that he has defended his mistreatment of others the first time around and refused to listen the second time, Bob must go (IMO). If you're the host whose home is housing the game, it's even easier to eject him. If not, you need to consult with the host before giving him the ultimatum. Either way, you need to make contigency plans for handling him (up to and including involvement of the police) if he decides to leave a path of destruction in his exit.

Sorry for the bleak outlook, but I don't hold out much hope for reforming troublemakers in the hobby and I have even less tolerance for them, if any.

Pax et bonum,

Dale

[ken-do-nim]

When the problem first cropped up I tried talking to Bob who actually tried to defend his mistreatment of the other party members, saying it was within his True Neutral alignment.

Arrange a curse that turns him Lawful Good.

[Math_Mage]

Arrange a curse that turns him Lawful Good.

Expressing DM frustrations with a player by railroading his character's behavior is generally inadvisable. Especially since that's basically what Bob is doing to the other players.

I think Jay R's approach is a very interesting one. My first reaction was to be more direct: "Your attitude is causing a problem with the group. I'm tired of hearing you--not your character, you--manipulate, insult, and threaten your fellow players. You can find a way to have fun playing in this campaign without ruining the experience for the others, or you can leave. Do you want to continue playing?"

Whether or not you make the fact of this conversation public is up to you, but I wouldn't include the other players in the conversation itself.

[ken-do-nim]

Expressing DM frustrations with a player by railroading his character's behavior is generally inadvisable. Especially since that's basically what Bob is doing to the other players.


Heh, I agree, but I'm always curious when you get these obnoxious players who hide behind their dubiously chosen alignment that when they get a new alignment, will they come up with another reason to be obnoxious or not? Call it a social experiment :smallsmile:

[Killer Angel]

Arrange a curse that turns him Lawful Good.

Do it on the player, and it will work even better. :smalltongue:

[Knaight]

Given that he has defended his mistreatment of others the first time around and refused to listen the second time, Bob must go (IMO). If you're the host whose home is housing the game, it's even easier to eject him. If not, you need to consult with the host before giving him the ultimatum. Either way, you need to make contigency plans for handling him (up to and including involvement of the police) if he decides to leave a path of destruction in his exit.

The guy needs to go, yes. That said, you really don't need to plan for police involvement, or even have contingency plans for a "path of destruction". Really, the worst case scenario that is likely enough to be considering is that the guy yells a bit.

[Tyndmyr]

If the guy uses char personality or alignment as an explanation, explain that he controls both these things, and that his explanation is akin to pushing someone off a building and claiming "I didn't kill him, gravity did".

[MickJay]

Remind the player that the alignment is a result of character's actions, not their cause. If a character acts in a certain way, the alignment should follow (at DM's discretion). Using alignment as a reason, or an excuse for character's actions simply shows the player doesn't understand what alignments are. In any case, the responsibility for all the character's decisions is player's.

[Shurz]

I agree with ken-do-nim's suggestion. Make his actions in the game sort him out. It will drive the character change or have the player leave voluntary.

A cursed gem or item might do nicely, starting off low-key with invisible insect bites, hearing voices and seeing visions affecting his character stats, skills, or something else that may fit in better.
Now that he is cursed, he is suddenly having forces of evil seek him out to commit foul deeds, others asking for his assistance to their master's bidding, offering him quests. Minor demons may appear telling him that their master is looking forward to feeding on his soul, that is has now been promised to them to be devoured in eternal agony. At the same time very powerful clerics and paladin start popping out of the woodwork looking for the evil that must be purged and the character annihilated, causing a lot of trouble for the group, getting Bob in trouble with the law which can only be sorted at great cost to Bob. The only way for Bob to avoid all this is to start becoming lawful good, altruistic, help old ladies over the street, tithing in churches and giving of his wealth to the poor. Especially if there is a horde of paladins on his trail checking everything he did, if there was any evil act they could use to destroy him. Make him work himself ragged. Even better is if information he wants to get something wont be given to him because he is an evil character.
Then, see if the group dynamic still works at any level, get the other players to stand up to his defense, to help save him, with a lot of grumbling and cursing, as he now owes his group a lot of favor. Favor, that he will have to work hard for to pay back.

For future reference, never let him play anything that is remotely antagonistic in your campaigns - that is if you still want him in your group. But one thing is certain - his comment "my character would not" - is not permitted in the game anymore. Only thing accepted is for his character to find reasons for "I, character, will find reason to do".
If that is unacceptable, then let the paladins destroy the evil and tell Bob he gets to create a lawful good character that is all about peace, love and understanding. A paladin for example, that has a mission to convert others by doing good, never asking others to or condemning others. That will most likely scare him away.

[LemuneSD]

So, it's been a while and I'd be interested to see what Censored has done about Bob.

But a lot of the suggestions seem to be to take away the RP element from RPG. While Bob is clearly an antagonist, he should be allowed to play his character how he wants in game. If his game style is not appreciated (and I personally DON'T appreciate his style) then he shouldn't be invited to the game any longer.

From my experience, not only railroading a player but forcing him to act how you want him to act, is usually a quick way to break up any gaming group (at the very least usually ends in a changing of GMs). Telling him his alignment has shifted due to his choice of actions is cause & effect and perfectly fine. To make him play a lawful character? Good luck with that xD

Edit: Also, if the other players are really having a rough time with the one guy, they can always band together and stand up to Bob in-game. Kill him, if necessary. After all, Heroes fight antagonists. It's what they do!

[Reluctance]

Stuff.

Do not use in-game penalties to fix player personality issues. That's seriously counterproductive. The dude's being a douche because he likes the attention and getting a rise out of people. Giving him even more attention and making him more focal to the game is going to discourage him how?

[Vknight]

Do not use in-game penalties to fix player personality issues. That's seriously counterproductive. The dude's being a douche because he likes the attention and getting a rise out of people. Giving him even more attention and making him more focal to the game is going to discourage him how?

It is a combination of in character and out of character problems.
He may be a bully in character but a nice guy out of character. Or it could be a problem of a mix of the two.
Out of character talk to him and also tell the others they can stand up for themselves

So for in character do this
Don't actively punish be subtle penalties evil beings coming to make deals. Turn his wants against him. A slope into villainy and tyranny. Then end the campaign saying you need to think.
Come back and tell the party that you want to use the same world but jump 20years later.
And hey there is a new villainous tyrant upon the land!

[horngeek]

The guy needs to go, yes. That said, you really don't need to plan for police involvement, or even have contingency plans for a "path of destruction". Really, the worst case scenario that is likely enough to be considering is that the guy yells a bit.

Lanky might disagree with you. :smalltongue:

Seriously, in-game penalties are a bad idea. But I, personally, would have no room for a bully in my game. If he has been told to stop and has not done so, the next step is to remove him from the game.

[Knaight]

Lanky might disagree with you. :smalltongue:


I have no reason to believe that the Lanky incident is high probability enough to justify explicit contingency planning around it as a basic precaution.

[Tyndmyr]

I have no reason to believe that the Lanky incident is high probability enough to justify explicit contingency planning around it as a basic precaution.

I would hope not. Roleplaying as an extreme violent sport would be...rather odd.

[Knaight]

I would hope not. Roleplaying as an extreme violent sport would be...rather odd.

Yeah, if I seriously had to prepare for violent responses as part of the hobby, I wouldn't be in the hobby.