Trouble With A Player...

[Sandwich8080]

Hello, GitP! I've been browsing the forums for quite a while and never thought I'd have to post anything, but I come with an issue.

I've been DMing for 13 years now. In those 13 years, I have DMed for roughly 20-25 people. And I have NEVER had as many problems with a player as I have with one of my newest. (For simplicity's sake and anonymity, let's call him "Bob".)

Bob came into our group recently with what he said was several years of experience playing elsewhere. I was skeptical, because our group (at least the ones who still play) has been playing together for about 10 years. Nevertheless, I welcomed him in and guided him through our house rules. That's when the problems started...

(This may sound like a rant, but I promise I'm getting to my point.) Bob is an unlikable person. As harsh as that may sound, I've had only one person at the table not voice complaints about him to me in private. He doesn't pay attention to important aspects of the game. Specifically, he recently tried to take a prestige class without having any of the requirements for it. When I told him he'd have to take a few more levels in his base class first, he changed it, but left the special abilities of the prestige class on his sheet. I assumed he just was leaving them on there for when he did finally get the prestige class. That same night, he tried using one of the abilities. I wouldn't call that cheating, just absentmindedness, but he's already been privately accused of cheating. I had a player who sits next to him say "Twice that night I'm sure I saw a single digit on his d20, but he said he got a 19?" (The group was level 1 or 2 at the time, so I'm not banking on a ridiculously high bonus.)

To try and remedy the dice rolling incident, I said everyone needed to roll towards the center of the table with easy to read dice. (Since then, he has failed things a LOT more.) Now comes my biggest issue...

Currently, I'm using Exemplars of Evil (specifically The Much Kill) as a guide for the BBEG in the campaign. Last session, he offhandedly said to me, "So I was looking through the books and I accidentally read about The Much Kill and stuff." I asked why he was in Exemplars of Evil in the first place and he said he was looking for spells and feats. He runs a NG cleric, so I don't see why he'd think he'd find anything in that book anyway. Regardless, I asked him how much he read and he said "Only like the first paragraph or so!" Well I found out tonight that he read all the way through the chapter. And he apparently tried to warn one other player about some of the dangers involved, luckily that player refused to listen.

So I come to you asking what I should do. Cheating or anything like it has never been an issue at our games. Even if he isn't cheating, I now have a player sitting on enough knowledge to ruin every bit of plot I have planned out for this campaign. My first inclination would be to kick him out, but he's one of our player's bosses son (Which is how he joined our group in the first place.)

Sorry for the novel, I often get long-winded without realizing it. And thanks in advance!

[Alaris]

OUCH! That's REALLY...OUCH.

Okay, well Bob is certainly a problem player.

So far, you've remedied each situation appropriately I think, with just trying to restrict his 'cheating' each time it has come up. But... the last issue, you can't really restrict. That's... a problem. A really bad problem.

I haven't had much in the way of problems like that, [with players reading material about the campaign they aren't supposed to see], since I run pure homebrew as far as campaign setting and characters are concerned, but I can understand the problem regardless.

Well, you honestly don't have many choices, but I will tell you how I'd handle it, presuming I couldn't kick him out, [since it would make problems for another friend of yours].

1. Alright, first thing I would do is sit him down, and tell him that I know he read the entire thing. Get it out in the open immediately.

2. Second thing, give him one warning. From this point forward. If he metagames with any of that knowledge, or if you even THINK he's metagaming with that knowledge, there will be massive penalties to his character. I'm talking "Lose a level" penalties at this point. It's obvious he was snooping to get information on your stuff, so you need to snuff that out really quick.

3. If he actually tries to metagame, by telling other players, or using the knowledge himself, go through with the penalties. If you can't kick him out, then punish his character drastically for what the player is doing. It's cheating, plain and simple.

At the end of the day, there's only one other thing I could tell you to do, and it would require a hell of a lot more work on your part.

That would be... to re-write your plot. Either on a massive scale, or on a small scale, but it needs to be different enough that the things he knows will no longer matter. Hell, you could be a jerk, and make it so anything he knows now would get his character killed if he used it in-game, because it's not true anymore.

Put simply, he is a threat to your campaign at this point, and you need to nip it in the bud. IMMEDIATELY.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Hand him his walking papers and tell him to have a nice life.

Nothing in your short essay there seems to indicate that this fellow has any redeeming qualities worth letting him stick around for. I'm all for giving people a fair shot, but you've got at least circumstantial evidence and eye witnesses to him cheating, and it sounds like the whole group dislikes him.

This really seems like a no-brainer to me. Is there something else that you haven't mentioned that makes this course less obvious, or do you simply dislike the idea of the coming confrontation?

New info makes this bad advice, please disregard.

[Alaris]

Hand him his walking papers and tell him to have a nice life.

Nothing in your short essay there seems to indicate that this fellow has any redeeming qualities worth letting him stick around for. I'm all for giving people a fair shot, but you've got at least circumstantial evidence and eye witnesses to him cheating, and it sounds like the whole group dislikes him.

This really seems like a no-brainer to me. Is there something else that you haven't mentioned that makes this course less obvious, or do you simply dislike the idea of the coming confrontation?

It appears the issue with 'kicking him out' is that it may cost one of his friend's his job.

[blazinghand]

It appears the issue with 'kicking him out' is that it may cost one of his friend's his job.

Indeed. The only way to kick him out would be to just "end" the campaign then start it off from where it was previously without him (if such a deception is possible).

Probably the easiest solution, if asking him not to metagame doesn't work, is to make some changes to the plot. This is a huge amount of work though and probably not what you wanted to work.

It's for this exact reason that mixing work and play isn't a great idea. Long run it's probably better to extricate yourself and your group from this situation... since it seems like problems may happen in the future.

[ThiagoMartell]

Man... that sounds like a lot of trouble. I'd kick him, but not with a friend's job in the balance.

How about we try to come up with changes to your overall plot so that it's still exciting and your friend has no risk of losing his job?

[Sandwich8080]

This really seems like a no-brainer to me. Is there something else that you haven't mentioned that makes this course less obvious, or do you simply dislike the idea of the coming confrontation?

Trust me, if I could kick him out, I would have back when all it was was dice troubles. But another one of my players works for his dad, and from what I gathered he was pressured pretty hard by his boss into letting Bob join.


Seriously, I've DMed for a group of 12 and 13 year olds. And they would never have acted like this.


2. Second thing, give him one warning. From this point forward. If he metagames with any of that knowledge, or if you even THINK he's metagaming with that knowledge, there will be massive penalties to his character. I'm talking "Lose a level" penalties at this point. It's obvious he was snooping to get information on your stuff, so you need to snuff that out really quick.


I like this idea quite a bit. Bob is the kind of player to react more to the numbers on his sheet than any other aspect of the game.

[Alaris]

Man... that sounds like a lot of trouble. I'd kick him, but not with a friend's job in the balance.

How about we try to come up with changes to your overall plot so that it's still exciting and your friend has no risk of losing his job?

If your friend's don't read the board, that sounds like a good idea. We can help you out in figuring out some twists and turns to keep the plot interesting, and to make 'Bob's' OOC knowledge entirely useless.

Otherwise, I like blazinghand's recommendation. If you can pull it off, "End" the campaign, and then pick it up without telling 'Bob,' exactly where you guys had left off, with his character simply not there.

EDIT: *Nod* Given what he was doing with the prestige class stuff, it seems he cares about the numbers. Take the recommendation you believe will work, and run with it. ^_^ Let us know how it turns out, I'm curious.

[Sandwich8080]

As far as retooling the campaign goes, I'm actually just using the information in the book as a "skeleton" to my campaign. I don't know if anyone has used the Exemplars of Evil books, but it's just a list of BBEGs with a "here's an idea for a plot!" paragraph or two. What I really have an issue with is that he 1. Read the book, even after realizing what he was reading, and 2. Is going to have a LOAD of knowledge about the final encounter. The one specific thing that one other player heard was "When we fight him, make sure and stay out of the water, there are sharks that circle the ship!" If he knows that, he knows a lot more about what the encounter is about. And I've been wanting to run this specific encounter since we bought the book quite a while back.

I know this might not lead to much enjoyment for him, but he's the reason I have to make changes. Would it be entirely unreasonable for me to ask him to sit out on the session with the BBEG? In the middle of combat, its going to be difficult for me to distinguish between metagaming and strategy/luck.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Your friend isn't the one kicking Bob. You are.

If the guy gets fired he's got a decent wrongful termination suite in many states. Besides he'd probably be better off in the long run not working for a guy like that to begin with, if he's actually such a bastard as to fire an employee over something he had no control over.

If you're still not willing to take the chance though, you and the rest of the group can conspire to troll Bob until he doesn't want to play anymore. You can even cheat him with a clear concience since he's been forced on you like this. How unfortunate that all those traps keep appearing in front of him, ya know what I'm saying?

Seriously, let the others in on it, then use 25 years of experience in what not to do as a DM grind him out of the hobby forever. People like this deserve no mercy and no quarter.

Edit: just so you know, I wouldn't give that advice under nearly any other circumstance. I normally advocate communication and civility as -the- means of handling conflict, but this guy's got to go. If you can't just ask him to leave, then make him sorry he ever came.

New info makes this bad advice, please disregard.

[Alaris]

As far as retooling the campaign goes, I'm actually just using the information in the book as a "skeleton" to my campaign. I don't know if anyone has used the Exemplars of Evil books, but it's just a list of BBEGs with a "here's an idea for a plot!" paragraph or two. What I really have an issue with is that he 1. Read the book, even after realizing what he was reading, and 2. Is going to have a LOAD of knowledge about the final encounter. The one specific thing that one other player heard was "When we fight him, make sure and stay out of the water, there are sharks that circle the ship!" If he knows that, he knows a lot more about what the encounter is about. And I've been wanting to run this specific encounter since we bought the book quite a while back.

I know this might not lead to much enjoyment for him, but he's the reason I have to make changes. Would it be entirely unreasonable for me to ask him to sit out on the session with the BBEG? In the middle of combat, its going to be difficult for me to distinguish between metagaming and strategy/luck.

Well, you have two choices there, as you've pretty much said.

1. You can retool the encounter entirely, so that all that he knows means nothing. This sucks, I know, but if you want to include him, I would do it. The other problem here is that... he may tell the other players about the final encounter, whether they want to listen or not. And if they hear it, it sucks, but it ends up being spoiled.

2. Ask him to sit out. The problem is, again, he could tell the other players, whether they want to hear it or not. Then it's a matter of "Everyone knows... well... ****..."

So... >.> my recommendation at the end of the day, unfortunately, is to retool the last encounter.

EDIT: Curiousity bugs me, so I have to ask. Roughly how old is "Bob?"

[Jeff the Green]

If the guy gets fired he's got a decent wrongful termination suite in many states. Besides he'd probably be better off in the long run not working for a guy like that to begin with, if he's actually such a bastard as to fire an employee over something he had no control over.

This may or may not be true; employment law is stacked against employees in the states. Check with a lawyer before banking on it.

And in any case, a boss can make an employee's life hell even without firing him.

[Sandwich8080]

EDIT: Curiousity bugs me, so I have to ask. Roughly how old is "Bob?"

Bob is 25. Compared to (using the 'main' group's ages) 20 (me), 20, 21, 22, 22, and 54.

And I think what I'm going to do is sit down and talk with him 1 on 1. I'll then use that conversation to decide whether he can play in the main encounter or not. I trust my other players not to let him tell them about it. If that fails (luckily we've got a couple levels to go until the BBEG), I'm using Kelb_Panthera's suggestion. I'm sure after 4 consecutive weeks of any effect that makes a character worthless (worse than death for a number-cruncher), he'll lose interest in the group. Or at least get the hint to never do that again.

[Kelb_Panthera]

This may or may not be true; employment law is stacked against employees in the states. Check with a lawyer before banking on it.

And in any case, a boss can make an employee's life hell even without firing him.

"I was fired because my friends didn't like my boss's son and asked him not to impose himself on our games in my off time."

If his performance is otherwise satisfactory then I really don't see him losing unless he's in an employ-at-will state, but like I said, that's just plan A.

@ OP: Jeff the Green is right though. If you do go that route, be sure to ask your friend if he's okay with taking that chance. If either you or he is uncomfortable with that gamble, then by all means don't do it.

Go with plan B :belkar:

Like I edited into my last post, I'm not normally one to advocate antagonistic, passive-aggressive behavior of any sort, but making Bob's experience as hellish as you can without making it obvious that it's what you're doing is probably going to be the fastest solution.

In fact, if you have FC2 you can literally send the party to hell for a meat-grinder of a campaign. Just let the others in on it and assure them that things will go back to normal in a few sessions after Bob quits because he's tired of getting his butt handed to him, sometimes literally, by angry chain devils.

Let your dark-side show strong and bright.

....... I think my evil's showing....... :belkar:

New info makes this bad advice, please disregard.

[Parra]

Your friend isn't the one kicking Bob. You are.

If the guy gets fired he's got a decent wrongful termination suite in many states. Besides he'd probably be better off in the long run not working for a guy like that to begin with, if he's actually such a bastard as to fire an employee over something he had no control over.

You could even get your friend to pretend to side with Bob so that when it gets back to daddy/boss then the friend comes off looking good.

[GeriSch]

I'd go with altering the encounter, make sure you completely warp any vulnerabilities and special abilities as written to something completely different, so his meta-knowledge could end very harmful if used. (for example, if the BBEG as in the book would be vulnerable to fire give him the ability to redirect any fire spells as an immediate action and let him have some other vulnerability instead)

gr,
Geri

[only1doug]

The one specific thing that one other player heard was "When we fight him, make sure and stay out of the water, there are sharks that circle the ship!" If he knows that, he knows a lot more about what the encounter is about. And I've been wanting to run this specific encounter since we bought the book quite a while back.

I know this might not lead to much enjoyment for him, but he's the reason I have to make changes. Would it be entirely unreasonable for me to ask him to sit out on the session with the BBEG? In the middle of combat, its going to be difficult for me to distinguish between metagaming and strategy/luck.

When they have the Boss fight the Sharks have become dire-Hawks, the water is the safe place to be, similar changes to other aspects of the encounter so that assumptions made based on the book are incorrect.

I'd suspect that asking him to sit out the BBEG session would be unproductive, the guy sounds like he wouldn't do so willingly, Some kind of game construct that eliminates his character for that session perhaps?

I agree that it may be difficult to deal with this particular player and as you say the first step is a face to face with him.

[Malak'ai]

I might have a way to avoid backlash for your friend if you do end up kicking 'Bob' out, go down and see Daddy yourself.
Sit down with him and explain that there have been problems with 'Bob's' attitude and ethics right from the word go and that it is having seriously detrimental effects on your pre-exisiting group and that you're at the point of kicking him out unless he pulls his head in.
That way if 'Bob' goes running to Daddy and tells tales he has it right from the horses mouth about why 'Bob' was kicked out, and he also knows it was YOUR decision and had nothing to do with your friend.

[Yahzi]

his meta-knowledge could end very harmful if used. (for example, if the BBEG as in the book would be vulnerable to fire give him the ability to redirect any fire spells as an immediate action and let him have some other vulnerability instead)
This!

When you find a spy, you don't expose him, you feed him false info. Find something in the book that is crucial, and reverse it, so that using that information is immediately and totally fatal.

Then, drop clues during the campaign about it. Have NPCs warn them against using fire or whatever. "Bob" will assume you're just trying to throw him off, and will double down on using his secret knowledge. When you spring the trap, and he (or everybody) dies, he'll get mad and challenge you with the way the module was written. And then you say, "I rewrote the module a little bit. I kept trying to tell you guys not to use fire, don't you remember all those NPC warnings?"

[Sith_Happens]

I might have a way to avoid backlash for your friend if you do end up kicking 'Bob' out, go down and see Daddy yourself.
Sit down with him and explain that there have been problems with 'Bob's' attitude and ethics right from the word go and that it is having seriously detrimental effects on your pre-exisiting group and that you're at the point of kicking him out unless he pulls his head in.
That way if 'Bob' goes running to Daddy and tells tales he has it right from the horses mouth about why 'Bob' was kicked out, and he also knows it was YOUR decision and had nothing to do with your friend.

Going to second this right here. Having Bob in the group is a problem, and as long as you let him continue to be in the group you're going to keep having problems.

[Blue Lantern]

"I was fired because my friends didn't like my boss's son and asked him not to impose himself on our games in my off time."

If his performance is otherwise satisfactory then I really don't see him losing unless he's in an employ-at-will state, but like I said, that's just plan A.

@ OP: Jeff the Green is right though. If you do go that route, be sure to ask your friend if he's okay with taking that chance. If either you or he is uncomfortable with that gamble, then by all means don't do it.

Go with plan B :belkar:

Like I edited into my last post, I'm not normally one to advocate antagonistic, passive-aggressive behavior of any sort, but making Bob's experience as hellish as you can without making it obvious that it's what you're doing is probably going to be the fastest solution.

In fact, if you have FC2 you can literally send the party to hell for a meat-grinder of a campaign. Just let the others in on it and assure them that things will go back to normal in a few sessions after Bob quits because he's tired of getting his butt handed to him, sometimes literally, by angry chain devils.

Let your dark-side show strong and bright.

....... I think my evil's showing....... :belkar:


As bad as it sound I'll go with plan B, from how you picture it the Boy is a spoiled brat and his father doesn't seem to mind and might even encourage him, given how he pressured your friend into joining, I don't see any open confrontation with either of them going well. (But again, I do not know them)

[Templarkommando]

There are a lot of good suggestions here, but just for the sake of argument, let me throw my hat into the ring. Part of this is just me thinking out loud, so don't take this as anything other than a suggestion with which you can do whatever you want.

I suggest keeping an updated copy of his character sheet on hand at all times while DMing. You can also get a copy of the rest of the party's sheets so that you don't have to fend off the question "Why do you have copy of my character sheet, but no one else's character sheet?" Wait for a point when you think he's screwing with what his character sheet actually says and the look at his sheet and ask him (if this is the case) Where is that (bonus/special ability/whatever?" Then when he can't find an excuse for why he has that, let him pass it off as a mistake (despite the fact that we all know otherwise) and laugh it off. Later you can tell the story of that time that Bob thought he had Shadow Jump (From Shadow Dancer) but he really didn't.

Player: "Okay, we need to escape from the adamantium golem. Are there any visible exits?"

DM: "Haha, that reminds me of the time that Bob thought he had shadow jump but he really didn't. You could shadow jump out lol. But seriously, there is an exit on the other side of the golem, and the way you came from."

This can apply to any number of situations, for example if you see that he rolls a 7 on his attack die and claims to have rolled a 19, you pull out his character sheet and look around for his bonus, being sure to account for flanking and any other pertinent bonuses. When you can't account for the +12 he says he has, ask him where it is. Then hopefully, he looks at his sheet stutters for a couple of minutes trying to explain this away, then try to pass it off as having been absent minded.

DM: "Yeah, I remember once when I was first starting out that thought I had a +10 attack bonus. Turns out I had spilled a tiny drop of soda next to the one so it looked like a zero. I just about never lived that one down."

Bob: "Did that really happen?"

DM: "No, but it's still a funny story."

At some point he's going to have to stop cheating if only to escape the perception by all of the other players that he's not Bob, he's Cheaty McCheaterson. If he persists, then you can always resort to embarrassing nicknames related to his gaffes.

DM: "Ok Shadow Dancer, roll initiative."

Finally, you could subtly point out that you could be doing to him what he's doing to the game. For example if he adds an extra +12 to attack roll where none exists start by saying what his enemy's attack would be with an extra 12 on it. Then when he asks how much damage, you just say "Naw, I was just kidding he rolled a 6 you're fine."

[kitcik]

On the "end the campaign" idea, two thoughts:

1) Have one of the players (not Bob's dad's employee) bring up a vote to kick him out. Based on the player ages listed, you have 5 players + Bob + yourself. The vote will be 4-3 to kick him out, with you / Bob and Bob's dad's employee voting to keep him. Problem solved.

2) Have the 4 non-Bob-related players "quit" the campaign. Have the campaign of you, Bob and Bob's dad's employee be total suckage where you don't scale down the challenges you previously designed and the players get totally owned. Run 1-2 sessions of this, then conclude it is not working and "end the campaign." Reform when the coast is clear (maybe Bob's dad's empliyee can take Bob out for drinks on game night one week to take the heat off) and keep it quiet.

[Asheram]

There are a lot of good suggestions here, but just for the sake of argument, let me throw my hat into the ring. Part of this is just me thinking out loud, so don't take this as anything other than a suggestion with which you can do whatever you want.

I suggest keeping an updated copy of his character sheet on hand at all times while DMing. You can also get a copy of the rest of the party's sheets so that you don't have to fend off the question "Why do you have copy of my character sheet, but no one else's character sheet?" Wait for a point when you think he's screwing with what his character sheet actually says and the look at his sheet and ask him (if this is the case) Where is that (bonus/special ability/whatever?" Then when he can't find an excuse for why he has that, let him pass it off as a mistake (despite the fact that we all know otherwise) and laugh it off. Later you can tell the story of that time that Bob thought he had Shadow Jump (From Shadow Dancer) but he really didn't.

Player: "Okay, we need to escape from the adamantium golem. Are there any visible exits?"

DM: "Haha, that reminds me of the time that Bob thought he had shadow jump but he really didn't. You could shadow jump out lol. But seriously, there is an exit on the other side of the golem, and the way you came from."

This can apply to any number of situations, for example if you see that he rolls a 7 on his attack die and claims to have rolled a 19, you pull out his character sheet and look around for his bonus, being sure to account for flanking and any other pertinent bonuses. When you can't account for the +12 he says he has, ask him where it is. Then hopefully, he looks at his sheet stutters for a couple of minutes trying to explain this away, then try to pass it off as having been absent minded.

DM: "Yeah, I remember once when I was first starting out that thought I had a +10 attack bonus. Turns out I had spilled a tiny drop of soda next to the one so it looked like a zero. I just about never lived that one down."

Bob: "Did that really happen?"

DM: "No, but it's still a funny story."

At some point he's going to have to stop cheating if only to escape the perception by all of the other players that he's not Bob, he's Cheaty McCheaterson. If he persists, then you can always resort to embarrassing nicknames related to his gaffes.

DM: "Ok Shadow Dancer, roll initiative."

Finally, you could subtly point out that you could be doing to him what he's doing to the game. For example if he adds an extra +12 to attack roll where none exists start by saying what his enemy's attack would be with an extra 12 on it. Then when he asks how much damage, you just say "Naw, I was just kidding he rolled a 6 you're fine."

Even if that sounds very funny since it sounds like he doesn't really know anyone in the group perosnally it's essentially bullying and may lead to... bad things.

[Templarkommando]

Even if that sounds very funny since it sounds like he doesn't really know anyone in the group perosnally it's essentially bullying and may lead to... bad things.

Maybe I'm confused. In what way is it bullying?

[kitcik]

Maybe I'm confused. In what way is it bullying?

You're attempting to force someone to do what you want by shaming them - in what way is it not bullying?

[blazinghand]

I really think the best solution is to do this subtly with a fake campaign ending. Part of the issue with keeping him onboard is that from what it seems, the other players don't like him very much. D&D is an activity between friends, or at least comrades, and if Bob is making things worse for the other players, part of your responsibility as a DM is to rectify the situation. Talking to him should definitely help since he's an adult (I thought he was a child or at least a very young adult this whole time), but ultimately, some people just aren't good fits. Any sort of confrontation, bullying, or pressure on him to leave is probably not the best way to solve this situation, even if it's more honest to just "vote him off the island" because your friend's job is involved. I hate to recommend dishonesty but I think it would spare Bob's feelings if he won't reform.

[docnessuno]

Another option is to stage a BIG fake discussion with the player who is risking to lose his job, and eject him from the group.

A couple sessions later you can call out the problematic player and ask him to leave the goup.

Following that the first guy would obviously be re-introduced in the group.

[Templarkommando]

You're attempting to force someone to do what you want by shaming them - in what way is it not bullying?

Everyone should have the "shame" to refrain from cheating.

[Ardantis]

Here's a trick I learned from my time as a comedian among the Orthodox-

Give him responsibility.

Self-serving players have no idea what to do with it.

Give him a job- something the party will depend upon. The pressure will either bring out the best in him, or reveal his weaknesses. Maybe both.

Either way, it makes your issue a community issue- in game.

[kitcik]

Everyone should have the "shame" to refrain from cheating.

Stop bullying me.:smallbiggrin:

[scurv]

OMG You can have so much fun with those types of players!


always make sure their dice are clean. A little well placed clear coat can do amassing things to the dice rolling statics....and take copies of someones char sheet for review every session, and his every other to every third session

Draw up about a dozen swap chars to substitute as needed

You know all those places that had treasure finds, Add cooler traps there! or just move the treasure.

You know all the fun locations that had danger clearly marked on the maps? He knows them too! have fun with it just to keep him on his toes

Arrange some Aesop morality test, that is just for him! Watch him squirm, And even if he is playing for team evil, you can still have fun with this.

[Arcanist]

Generally when dealing with a player like this I just take him aside and peacefully discuss this in a calm and helpful manner. If I'm doing a module I actually encourage players to read it all, because it won't exactly help them. Usually it makes it a little worse on them... Oh? The book calls for a band of Sorcerers to burst into the Tarvern and attempt to assassinate the party? Screw that... I'm using Artificers with Wands of Celerity, Badges of Favor of the Martyr and Eternal Wands of magic missile (all of which are destroyed because they all drank Death Throes potions prior to fighting the party. LEAVE NO SURVIVORS!)

Not only is the encounter... well dangerously "stacked" against the party, but regardless they can't get any information out of the dead bodies and BAM! look at that, no treasure either :smallbiggrin:

When I want my party to remember the session, I use critical fumble (yes, even for skill checks) and have them roll their dice into a dish (or I roll them). I've never really experienced a cheater I couldn't hardball into calming down. When you choose to metagame that is effectively a declaration of war against the DM, the other players and the campaign as a whole... :smallsigh:

[kitcik]

Generally when dealing with a player like this I just take him aside and peacefully discuss this in a calm and helpful manner. If I'm doing a module I actually encourage players to read it all, because it won't exactly help them. Usually it makes it a little worse on them... Oh? The book calls for a band of Sorcerers to burst into the Tarvern and attempt to assassinate the party? Screw that... I'm using Artificers with Wands of Celerity, Badges of Favor of the Martyr and Eternal Wands of magic missile (all of which are destroyed because they all drank Death Throes potions prior to fighting the party. LEAVE NO SURVIVORS!)

Not only is the encounter... well dangerously "stacked" against the party, but regardless they can't get any information out of the dead bodies and BAM! look at that, no treasure either :smallbiggrin:

When I want my party to remember the session, I use critical fumble (yes, even for skill checks) and have them roll their dice into a dish (or I roll them). I've never really experienced a cheater I couldn't hardball into calming down. When you choose to metagame that is effectively a declaration of war against the DM, the other players and the campaign as a whole... :smallsigh:

So effectively you fight back by using the scorched earth policy on your own campaign and the non-cheating players with a no-loot likely-TPK? Makes sense?!?

[Marlowe]

Am slightly concerned that though the metagaming and cheating are definitely a problem, the big issue seems to be his status as an "unlikable person". And there's no specifics on how.

If it's just that the OP doesn't want to gossip, that's fair enough. But is he an unlikable person that might be amenable to being talked to or not? I've known very likable people that were insufferable to game with, and on the other hand people I disliked socially that turned into good companions while roleplaying with them. And then you get people that are a pain in the neck in both capacities.

I may be asking more than the OP feels comfortable providing, but we're only hearing half the story here and it makes it hard to make any kind of opinion. Is there a possibility of dealing with this guy reasonably out of character?

[ahenobarbi]

Firstly the both issues you brought up are relatively easy to deal with. As already stated in the thread to avoid cheating:
- Everybody should be able to see roll result (no dice touching before you look!).
- Give character sheets a quick check before every (second? third? after-leveling?) session and maybe keep a copy for reference mid-session.

To avoid meta-gaming with as little effort on your part let him spoil his fun with it. But introduce severe penalties (10% XP needed to level?) if he spoils others fun with it (saying aloud something his character could not know) (of course you'd have to apply this penalty to everyone).

Also the problems might just go away in a few sessions - some people (including me) are sometimes so excited about a new game they will spoil others fun accidentally, but if you give us sometime to calm down it gets better :smallsmile: (I don't know Bob but that might be the case)

But if the real issue is that Bob is "unlikeable" person you can't really do anything about it. If his mere presence is spoiling the game (not metagaming or cheating) you'd better find some way to get him out of the game. Just check with employee-of-bobs-father if [s]he's OK with what you want to do. Because you're only involved, [s]he's committed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicken_and_the_Pig).

[Arcanist]

So effectively you fight back by using the scorched earth policy on your own campaign and the non-cheating players with a no-loot likely-TPK? Makes sense?!?

Hmm... perhaps I used an extreme example :smallconfused:

Let me be straight forward in my response to a cheating player. "If a player is cheating, then as a DM it is within my rights to make the challenges more appropriate by optimizing my encounters"

Even using the example given, a cheating player will still have an advantage in the form of knowing what is on the other side of the screen. The Artificer thing can be rendered moot when 4th level spells comes online... :smallsigh:

If you get into a game of Rocket tag with the DM, you don't expect to win. A lot of people forget that a lot of TO gets nipped in the butt by a competent DM and just think "I'M A WIZARD, KNEEL BEFORE MY AWESOME!". Momma Black Dragon proves this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0627.html).

[Twilightwyrm]

Well...that is quite a problem you have there. The last problem (with the Much Kill) can be solved by a good dose of ad hoc DMing in your part. Either pull a switch and have those signs that were pointing to the Much Kill before, actually be pointing to something else (related or otherwise). Now I grant this may be somewhat unsatisfactory, especially if you were having fun with the Much Kill being the main BBEG of your game, and don't wish to change this; should this be the case, simply change some signs and aspects of the Much Kill to throw him off (meta-gamers are, for some reason, almost MORE susceptible to red herrings) and otherwise render his having read the chapter more or less pointless.
This is, as you seem to hint however, part of a broader issue with this player. Your anti-cheating policies were the right way to go, but even if you do all this fine, I doubt these will be the last of your problems with him. If it gets really bad, you may have to talk to him about it, even if he is your friend's boss. Unless you get the sense that he is a petty and vindictive person, remaining polite and fair (even if he is not) with him should prevent any following bad feelings, and make him cognizant his shenanigans are not appreciated without coming off as judgmental. For the time being, so long as it does not interfere with the fun of the other players in the game, I would suggest sticking to your current character and dice "transparency" policies, as well as the wonderful powers of ad hocing that being the DM allows. Hopefully, disincentivizing his problematic actions will cause him to stop them.

[sdream]

You are uncomfortable because he might be being dishonest, and afraid that angering him might lead to sidelong abuse?

The most hypocritical "solution" imaginable would be to be sidelong abusive to him in game, and have the world "cheat" to set nasty problems just for him and no other player.


It sounds like you guys got off on the wrong foot, and you don;t trust and appreciate him the way you trust and appreciate the folks you've known for a decade.

That seems normal to me.

I would try to start fresh with him.

Rework anything you feel he might have "spoiled" that is absolutely essential.

And announce that if you suspect metagaming you may demand an in character justification for the action, and perhaps a skill check to make the correct call.

Don't cheat to teach cheaters, be more truthful and open to teach them.

[vrigar]

We once had a similar situation.
I was the DM and we had a terrible liar who made herself unwanted by the majority of the group.
She was also my roommate.
We tried reasoning with her, having one on one and group discussions. Nothing helped. We intentionally set game times on her shifts at work so she couldn't come and she got fired.
Eventually we had an ugly deterioration of our relationship and we each left the apartment.
Some people play D&D to win. You can't enjoy a game with them around the table and nothing will solve it.
Sounds like you're in a very tight spot but if I were you I'd drop all the "legal advice" and try your best to make him leave the group. Sounds like making him fail repeatedly will result in him quitting in a short while.
If you don't want him to quit XP penalties are quite extreme in my taste but I have used them to make a point (a player who read on a monster and insisted I played them wrong) and the point was soundly made.

[Quietus]

Why not ask Bob's dad for advice? He's a member at the gaming table. I kind of walk the line on this one, on one hand it's kind of weird to be like "Go tell his dad!". On the other, maybe Bob's dad would have some good advice as to how to get Bob to step back in line, or what sorts of things he'd respond to in terms of telling him to knock off the metagaming/cheating.

[WarKitty]

We once had a similar situation.
I was the DM and we had a terrible liar who made herself unwanted by the majority of the group.
She was also my roommate.
We tried reasoning with her, having one on one and group discussions. Nothing helped. We intentionally set game times on her shifts at work so she couldn't come and she got fired.
Eventually we had an ugly deterioration of our relationship and we each left the apartment.
Some people play D&D to win. You can't enjoy a game with them around the table and nothing will solve it.
Sounds like you're in a very tight spot but if I were you I'd drop all the "legal advice" and try your best to make him leave the group. Sounds like making him fail repeatedly will result in him quitting in a short while.
If you don't want him to quit XP penalties are quite extreme in my taste but I have used them to make a point (a player who read on a monster and insisted I played them wrong) and the point was soundly made.

Thankfully with this type, you probably don't even need to *make* him fail repeatedly. Most of the time running a challenging game where his cheating doesn't work will do the trick.

And seriously, tell your friend he needs to look for another job. Not for your sake, but for his.

[Deathkeeper]

I had a few problem players in my first campaign. They got killed, one through plot (he was dumb enough to murder a Gold Dragon. As a cleric. Whose order revered gold dragons.) and the other through terrible tactics ("I know I have 12 hp left, but I'm sure the Giant won't hit me!"). At the first, we had him stay out by telling him we were giving a newcomer a chance to play (the fact that said newcomer was an old friend of mine wasn't mentioned) and the second oddly never asked, she just assumed she was out.

Unfortunately, I don't think a convenient trap will get you out of this one, unless getting killed would really discourage him that much, so I would suggest just trying to be more subtle in discouraging him or just talking to him, although the way you describe him says that talking probably won't work. I would advise against just kicking him unless your friend says it's okay; I wouldn't risk it for him.

[Ravenica]

Hell, tattle to the guys dad, drop by the office and ask him to talk his son into behaving, otherwise you will have to drop him. You nip 2 problems in the bud, if you do drop him, his dad CANNOT drop your friend because he will outright be opening himself up to wrongful termination, and 2 his son will probably leave after his dad rages at him for such an embarassment :smallyuk:

[kitcik]

Hell, tattle to the guys dad, drop by the office and ask him to talk his son into behaving, otherwise you will have to drop him. You nip 2 problems in the bud, if you do drop him, his dad CANNOT drop your friend because he will outright be opening himself up to wrongful termination, and 2 his son will probably leave after his dad rages at him for such an embarassment :smallyuk:

To the various people that have suggested this: the OP is 20 and Bob is 25, meaning his dad is like 50.

Do you really expect a 20-year-old to walk into a 50-year-old exec's office that he has never met and tell him his son is an a-hole and can't play with him anymore (but my friend is really cool and should still be your employee)?

That's just a ridiculous suggestion.

Take a look at my 10:55am post for some better suggestions.

[Origomar]

You could just have a month period where you all have things coming up that don't allow you to play, and then one day you just be like "I dont think we can play anymore, not enough people are showing up"

and then wait a few weeks and start playing again.

In order to seem realistic it would take forever, but it would work.

[WarKitty]

Hell, tattle to the guys dad, drop by the office and ask him to talk his son into behaving, otherwise you will have to drop him. You nip 2 problems in the bud, if you do drop him, his dad CANNOT drop your friend because he will outright be opening himself up to wrongful termination, and 2 his son will probably leave after his dad rages at him for such an embarassment :smallyuk:

Plus a lot of states in the U.S. aren't right-to-work. Meaning for all we know the employer could be completely within his legal rights to fire the friend for not having his son in the gaming group.

[kitcik]

You could just have a month period where you all have things coming up that don't allow you to play, and then one day you just be like "I dont think we can play anymore, not enough people are showing up"

and then wait a few weeks and start playing again.

In order to seem realistic it would take forever, but it would work.

During the interim, you could meet at McDOnald's / another player's house (who Bob doesn't know) on a different night and play without him.

[Ravenica]

To the various people that have suggested this: the OP is 20 and Bob is 25, meaning his dad is like 50.

Do you really expect a 20-year-old to walk into a 50-year-old exec's office that he has never met and tell him his son is an a-hole and can't play with him anymore (but my friend is really cool and should still be your employee)?

That's just a ridiculous suggestion.

Take a look at my 10:55am post for some better suggestions.

About as much as I expect any 50 year old dad to fire someone because their son got booted out of a dnd game yes

[Keld Denar]

To the various people that have suggested this: the OP is 20 and Bob is 25, meaning his dad is like 50.

Do you really expect a 20-year-old to walk into a 50-year-old exec's office that he has never met and tell him his son is an a-hole and can't play with him anymore (but my friend is really cool and should still be your employee)?

Not every 50 year old is a high powered executive. He could just be a small shop owner or mid level manager for a smallish company. I'd just get his cell # from the employee.

I'd take a two step approach. I haste passive-aggressive in game BS. This is a personal issue, resolve it in person. Take Bob aside, let him know that you know, and that that behavior is NOT acceptable and that there will be consequences.

Then talk to the dad. Tell him that you are concerned for his sons behavior. You are worried that his lack of ethics at the game might translate to other issues, steps issues outside of the game. Appeal to the dad's sense of morality and pride. Nobody wants to think that they raised a cheater. Use this. If he doesn't understand the nature of the game, tell him its like playing a casual basketball game and the player is always traveling and denies it when called out, or playing a casual touch football league and the player is intentionally tackling folks and hurting them. Its the same level of disruption.

Then simply tell the dad that you would rather not play at all than play with Bob if he keeps acting like that. That he its ruining the fun for you and everyone else. If I were Bob's dad, I'd sit down with him that night and have a long and very uncomfortable talk.

[Acanous]

^This.

If your friend is a competant employee who does his job properly, the boss isn't going to can him for non-work related reasons.
My guess here is that he leaned on your friend when he found out your friend had similar intrests to Bob, and he wanted Bob out of the house and doing things (Not being his problem for a while).

If he is an executive? He's more likely to have a seperation between professional conduct and his personal life.
The real rub is if he's a small business owner, like if your friend works for a yard maintenance company or small resturaunt.

The idea that your friend would get fired for your decision to boot the man's son from your gaming group is laughable in any respectable business circle.

Even in a state where you can be fired for no reason, firing a productive employee must be justified to your superiors. Unless Bob's dad *Owns the company*, he's not going to fire your friend. Even if he does own, he's unlikely to fire your friend.

{Scrubbed}

[Threadnaught]

Take Bob to one side and explain to him that as DM, it is not your job to just let him win or let him tell the story of his "awesome character who never fails." Here's a script I use for a player of my own, who I will not be dumping as it's a 2 player party and me... Also he can be a decent player when he's not whining about everything I do.

It is not my job to just let you win or let you tell the story of your "awesome character who never fails." There are more players here than just you, first of all, there's me, I am the game, I am the world around your character, the obstacles they must overcome. It is not my job to win, or lose, but to provide entertainment for everyone in the party by providing a suitable challenge. You see those other players? They need to have fun too, otherwise they'll leave and I will have no reason to do what I do. Because I'm definitely not doing this for just one person, especially if that person complains about every little thing I do.
I you want to win, then this is not the game YOU should be playing. You overcome challenges, defeat villains and become a great hero, or even defeat heroes and become a great villain, but you never win D&D. Unless you stop trying to win all the time, you will continue to be an outsider playing a different game to the rest of us.

See how he handles that.

[Deadlights]

Honestly, telling the problem player that the game was canceled and then continuing to run the game without him worked wonders for our group.

Then again, he was someone none of us had any ties to whatsoever outside the game.

[huttj509]

For contacting Bob's dad, if age is a concern, I notice you said you have a 54 year old in the group. Depending on this person's personality and involvement in the matter, if consulting Bob's dad is a path you decide to take, having the older person be the one to contact him may go over better with the boss.

Of course what I'm not accounting for is that in the group there's a whole web of relationships and personalities, and we only have access to a few pieces, the 54 year old might happen to be the last person to come across as calm and reasonable during confrontation, or may be the employee in question.

[Dr_S]

As bad as it sound I'll go with plan B, from how you picture it the Boy is a spoiled brat and his father doesn't seem to mind and might even encourage him, given how he pressured your friend into joining, I don't see any open confrontation with either of them going well. (But again, I do not know them)

I would guess the opposite. I'm guessing the father KNOWS his 25 year old adult son is an unlikable spoiled person, and may have pressured the employee into accepting a regular social setting with real people who won't put up with his **** might help him realize what a turd he is.

It's entirely possible that without prompting from him to join a table top gaming group this kid would otherwise spend his free time struggling to hold down a job and acting like a douche on the internet as his primary social interaction... (imagine all those multiplayer video game horror stories about those kids who spew racial slurs as their primary form of interaction. I imagine those people struggle to maintain healthy real world relationships as well.) So Execu-Dad says, "Maybe in a situation where acting like a **** has consequences, my son will learn that is he's a raging tool and turn his life around before he's stuck working garbage minimum wage jobs the rest of his life"

If THIS is the case, kicking him from the group may not upset the father as much, because that is a negative social consequence of acting like a screwdriver.

[Keld Denar]

That would be ideal. I don't doubt that the father knows his spawn is at the bear minimum, not a terribly social person. If he is pushing his son to the group in hopes that they might be able to parent his son better than he can, that does give your group some leverage, or at least takes away the threat of getting your friend fired.

Some times, tough love is required to teach a lesson. You don't always know what you had until its gone. If you have the ability to threaten to take away his participation in the group without fear of reprisal from the father, you can start building better behavior in this guy, first with the rod, but eventually with the carrot. Who knows, he might even blossom into a normal functioning human being. Maybe.

[scurv]

^This.



Finally: The US has always perplexed me with such laws. You can fire someone for no reason, or a stupid reason, taking away their ability to provide for themselves and their family, with no legal outlet available to the wronged person?
...in a place where it is legal to purchase and carry lethal firearms?
...where going to jail for life provides a better quality of living than being destitute?

Are they ASKING for higher murder statistics?

Basically. Although there is the modifications to ones sex life to consider when going to jail.

[Boci]

Then talk to the dad. Tell him that you are concerned for his sons behavior. You are worried that his lack of ethics at the game might translate to other issues, steps issues outside of the game.

I was with you until the last sentance. The issue is with the game, keep it focused on that. Don't speculate about Bob's moral character outside the game, focus on what you know. And good idea on finding something the father can relate to. If there is a game he enjoys, he should be able to understand how it would be undesierable to play with someone who cheats.

[Sandwich8080]

Wow... I didn't realize this thread would generate this much discussion. I'm going to try and answer some questions that have been brought up.

1. "Bob"s dad doesn't play, he's simply the boss of the 54 year old player. Bob also works for his dad (both at a small business), where I could see tough times for the 54 year old if Bob was to be booted. Even if he didn't get fired, he still has to work with Bob every day.

2. As far as Bob being an unlikable person, I don't want to sink in to a rant that won't serve a purpose, so I'll keep this brief. To list some traits, he will often get carried away in whatever he's saying and steadily raise in volume until someone tells him he needs to lower his voice, he's a habitual liar (one of those who lie for attention I think), and my only peeve (minus the cheating) is that he either has incorrect knowledge of the game or makes assumptions about the game and then stating them to everyone as fact. Only once has he argued with me saying I was wrong about a rule.

To expand on that last bit, he recently said that zombies are damaged by sunlight. I don't know if this is an alternate rule somewhere, but it isn't one I've heard of. Anyways, he told that to everybody saying he knew for a fact that they were. When the zombies in question moved out into sunlight and weren't affected, he put the game to a stop to argue with me about it. I don't often let players read the Monster Manual (so nobody can just look up the weaknesses of creatures they've never heard of before), but I let him read through the zombie description as long as he needed to see that they were unaffected. When he realized he was wrong, he didn't apologize. Instead, he just shrugged his shoulders and handed the book back to me.

3. I guess I've been a little one-sided in my explanation of Bob. Bob is a contributing member of the group, which is better than I can say for at least 2 of the other longer-term members. I don't want to turn this into a psych evaluation thread, but really I think Bob has an off-putting personality, which leads to him not having that many (if any at all) friends. Bob really seems to want to be a part of the group, since he will do things like fill in if a person can't cook that night (we have one person a week make a main dish and another make a side dish for our Saturday sessions) or drop $50 on a miniature I offhandedly said it'd be "cool to have". This makes me think simply threatening to boot him will scare him into behaving.


Regardless, I'm going to sit down 1 on 1 with Bob before the session tomorrow. I think I'll find out what all he knows, and tell him I'll let him decide if he thinks he can handle playing in the BBEG session or not. Regardless, I'll still tell him that if he reveals anything to any member of the group (even me) then I'm going to give him a 1-session "time out". If he does it again at any time in the campaign without my permission (we frequently do a sort of Q&A after big parts like "What did we miss?" or "What would that orb have done if I broke it?") then he's out. Maybe not for good, but at least until this campaign ends (which will be in at least a year.)

I'll post tomorrow night and let everyone know how it goes. Thank you all for posting, this has been an extremely helpful first thread :smallsmile:

[Kelb_Panthera]

Now that there's a much clearer picture, my previous advice may be a bit over-the-top.

Communication is probably the way to go. I gotta say though, I'm surprised that a 54 year old man would've let himself be pushed into this. These revelations make the picture much more complex than the spoiled bastard being pushed on the group by an overbearing employer picture that I had previously.

I look foward to reading your follow-up post.

[TuggyNE]

To list some traits, he will often get carried away in whatever he's saying and steadily raise in volume until someone tells him he needs to lower his voice, he's a habitual liar (one of those who lie for attention I think), and my only peeve (minus the cheating) is that he either has incorrect knowledge of the game or makes assumptions about the game and then stating them to everyone as fact.
[...]
3. I guess I've been a little one-sided in my explanation of Bob. Bob is a contributing member of the group, which is better than I can say for at least 2 of the other longer-term members. I don't want to turn this into a psych evaluation thread, but really I think Bob has an off-putting personality, which leads to him not having that many (if any at all) friends. Bob really seems to want to be a part of the group, since he will do things like fill in if a person can't cook that night (we have one person a week make a main dish and another make a side dish for our Saturday sessions) or drop $50 on a miniature I offhandedly said it'd be "cool to have". This makes me think simply threatening to boot him will scare him into behaving.

Strikes me this would be a good time to link to the 5 Geek Social Fallacies, so I'll just leave this here (http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html).

[GoatBoy]

Regardless, I'm going to sit down 1 on 1 with Bob before the session tomorrow.

Yes, this is by far the best course.

I am quite involved in my university's gaming group, and I have had experience with many players, some of them quite problematic. I have seen some improve, and I have seen some who refuse to acknowledge that they are doing anything wrong at all.

The fact that Bob has made efforts to reach out (via cooking and buying that mini) suggests that he really does want to be part of your group. Which suggests that he probably just isn't aware (at the time, anyway) that his behaviour causes you so much frustration. He sees it as a game, and you play games to win. Even the "cheating" you mentioned previously, with the dice rolls, he probably just sees it as random chance coming in and messing up the game that he expects that he should be playing, rather than trying to screw over and frustrate the DM. I doubt Bob would enjoy Dwarf Fortress ("Losing is Fun!")

It's very, very hard to be patient with a "case" like this, and you should pat yourself on the back for making the extra effort. In fact, I bet Bob doesn't encounter this kind of patience very often, hence his gestures to you. You're doing him a favour by telling him (in private!) that his behaviour is unwarranted, as long as you let him know that you're willing to work with him to help him improve. Perhaps you could work out a secret signal for those times when he needs to scale it back a bit. Afterwards, maybe give him some supporting remarks for the times when he played within the rules, even if things didn't turn out like he planned.

Best of luck. Please keep us updated.

[TopCheese]

I read the OP and then skipped right ahead to posting.

Can I join your group? Perhaps via skype? I'll make a PC that kills "bob" every session, you know "on accident".

If I can't play then perhaps find a random person to do the dirty work for you... Make it so they make Bob's gaming experience pure hell. Steal his stuff, damage him, screw him over, interupt every time he says something, or just murder him for 5 gp.

"Oh you looked at me wrong? *sneak attack*"

Or

"Oh you looked at me wrong? *fireball/lightning bolt/mind rape etc etc*

Then the rest of group act like they don't notice... But have the DM's friend kill or hurt the guy who works for Bob... Then Bob won't think that dude is in on it.

[Aegis013]

Sandwich8080, I'm glad you've chosen to take the mature path here. There has been a lot of suggestions for passive aggressive in-game punishment, and you're being the bigger person by actually talking it out instead. Bravo, sir.

[Yirrare]

The most hypocritical "solution" imaginable would be to be sidelong abusive to him in game, and have the world "cheat" to set nasty problems just for him and no other player.
[...]
Don't cheat to teach cheaters, be more truthful and open to teach them.I agree with this. Bullying him like that is just stupid. Turning his meta-gaming against him is both smart and funny though.

Tell me this: Do you think he would take the chance to view your new notes if he could?
If yes, accidentally make sure he knows about that door with a really dangerous trap. Remove the trap in secret. Watch him meta-game the trapfinding like crazy.
*Rogue searches for traps.*
DM:"You don't find any traps."
Bob: "Search again!"
Rogue: "Why would I? I found none here."
[...]
(This works best if you as DM roll trapfinding hidden from the group. So Bob et al don't know if it was a 1 or a 20.)

But why stop there? The paper stated the trap was a dominate person with a high DC. Let one of the other players in on the plan, so he bursts through the door when the first meta-gaming is getting out of hand. Roll a d20, smile at him and call for a break. Take him aside and discuss something in hushed voices. I take it you get the rest...

If he ever confronts you, tell him you realized the trap was stupid/overpowered. Then ask how on earth he could know that.

Best Regards
Yirrare

[super dark33]

Not only hes a cheater, but a bad cheater.
i mean, i would roll the dice, quickly take it and add 10 to the number!
the DMs didnt even know i was tricking them!
as for fake abilities: i would always use these non-regular classes like warlock that the DM had no idea how they work so i could practicly do what i wanted.
For glimpsing in books, i would keep the information to myself and prove as the hero on the fights.

Cheating on DnD is an art, and only experts can use it.

When you catch him cheating, put his charecter in prison dressed as a pink bunny.
if that wont make him angry i dont know what will.

[Arcanist]

Sandwich8080, I'm glad you've chosen to take the mature path here. There has been a lot of suggestions for passive aggressive in-game punishment, and you're being the bigger person by actually talking it out instead. Bravo, sir.

Just gonna throw this out there. This has very little to do with the topic at hand, but acting like the "bigger person" is in my experience teaches nothing to the "lesser person".

Hell, friends of mine have told me time and time again that biting my nails is a nasty habit and I should stop... and yet here I am, biting my nails... Talking to the other person about it generally makes them feel a sense of inferiority and despair ("I have a flaw that somebody else likes... I cannot fix it..."). If someone put rubber gloves on me without telling me why I would be confused for a moment, but I would adapt and stop biting my nails...

People don't change, just because you tell them too, they change because they have too.

Regardless of the above, congrats on being the bigger person :smallsmile:

[Wise Green Bean]

Next time he miraculously finds the ring that he could not reasonably have found if he weren't metagaming, make that ring a cursed ring. Make it try to eat him. Consider letting it keep a hand.

[Firechanter]

If you decide you do need to get rid of him, you'll need a somewhat more convoluted ploy to pull it off without repercussions to Bob's colleague. I'll call your 54 year old player Tom for now.

So: first, Tom drops out of the game. Maybe because he has to take care of his freeloading mother in law, or because his Männergesangsverein has rescheduled choir practice to saturday night.
So you play without Tom for a few sessions, maybe a month or two.

If everyone still wants to get rid of Bob, you can now just send him on his bike. Even if he whines to his daddy, Tom should be out of the line of fire.

And then you can celebrate Tom's return to your group.

--

And boy, does that ever confirm my stance about never talking about my private life at work. oÔ

[Kelb_Panthera]

Just gonna throw this out there. This has very little to do with the topic at hand, but acting like the "bigger person" is in my experience teaches nothing to the "lesser person".

Hell, friends of mine have told me time and time again that biting my nails is a nasty habit and I should stop... and yet here I am, biting my nails... Talking to the other person about it generally makes them feel a sense of inferiority and despair ("I have a flaw that somebody else likes... I cannot fix it..."). If someone put rubber gloves on me without telling me why I would be confused for a moment, but I would adapt and stop biting my nails...

People don't change, just because you tell them too, they change because they have too.

Regardless of the above, congrats on being the bigger person :smallsmile:

The important thing about changes in a person's behavior, is the genuine desire to change. If you really wanted to quit biting your nails, you would.

"Bob" has shown some rather notable signs of wanting to change. I'd never have suggested being a total bastard to him if I'd known that from go, btw. With encouragement and understanding, and very clear consequences for failure, he probably will change over time.

Necessity can be an important factor, but you'd be surprised at how often it fails to be enough when someone doesn't want to change.

[Arcanist]

=>Kelb_Panthera

The important thing about changes in a person's behavior, is the genuine desire to change. If you really wanted to quit biting your nails, you would.

I've been trying to stop biting my nails since middle school. It's just something I spontaneously do regardless of situation. I'm actually trying (Been wearing Mitts since the Summer started) and yet I've eaten through them in a little less then a day :smallsigh: I have nothing to make me change. No motivation, no driving force. Nothing.


"Bob" has shown some rather notable signs of wanting to change. I'd never have suggested being a total bastard to him if I'd known that from go, btw. With encouragement and understanding, and very clear consequences for failure, he probably will change over time.

Necessity can be an important factor, but you'd be surprised at how often it fails to be enough when someone doesn't want to change.

This actually bolsters my point... I'm not sure if you're being contrary to me anymore so eh...


Necessity can be an important factor, but you'd be surprised at how often it fails to be enough when someone doesn't want to change.

This is also true. Sometimes necessity isn't enough to make someone change. Sometimes, people just really don't want to change...

BUT! this is a topic for another thread in another section of the forum :smallsigh:

[Kelb_Panthera]

=>Kelb_Panthera


I've been trying to stop biting my nails since middle school. It's just something I spontaneously do regardless of situation. I'm actually trying (Been wearing Mitts since the Summer started) and yet I've eaten through them in a little less then a day :smallsigh: I have nothing to make me change. No motivation, no driving force. Nothing.



This actually bolsters my point... I'm not sure if you're being contrary to me anymore so eh...



This is also true. Sometimes necessity isn't enough to make someone change. Sometimes, people just really don't want to change...

BUT! this is a topic for another thread in another section of the forum :smallsigh:

Bolded for emphasis.
The problem you're most likely running into is that you think you should change the behavior, but you don't really -want- to change the behavior. There's also the fact that it's a most-likely subconcious behavior. Have you considered negative reinforcement? Try applying a bit of cayenne pepper to your finger nails via some sort of organic clear-coat and see if that doesn't help.

I do agree that taking this any further would warrant a discussion via PM or another thread.

[Sandwich8080]

Alright, I talked to Bob last night. Everything went wonderfully. I asked him to list everything he could remember reading. Either it wasn't much, or I'm just a sucker :smalltongue: He started apologizing before I even brought it up to him. We settled on the terms that he will be playing in the BBEG fight, and if he uses any of what he read in the book between now and then, the first offense will be sitting out for one session. The second time will be sitting out for the rest of the campaign (which will go on for at least a year.)

He also told me about how he tried to cheat one other time and nobody called him out on it (he tried to use a spell his cleric couldn't cast.) That's a little unsettling, but I'm glad he told me. The rest of the session went rather well. In fact, two of the members said to me "I don't know what you said to Bob, but he's actually not too bad to be around anymore." I think he just needed to be scared into place a little :smalltongue:

Thank you everybody, your advice helped me out a lot. I really appreciate it! :smallbiggrin:

[Kelb_Panthera]

Alright, I talked to Bob last night. Everything went wonderfully. I asked him to list everything he could remember reading. Either it wasn't much, or I'm just a sucker :smalltongue: He started apologizing before I even brought it up to him. We settled on the terms that he will be playing in the BBEG fight, and if he uses any of what he read in the book between now and then, the first offense will be sitting out for one session. The second time will be sitting out for the rest of the campaign (which will go on for at least a year.)

He also told me about how he tried to cheat one other time and nobody called him out on it (he tried to use a spell his cleric couldn't cast.) That's a little unsettling, but I'm glad he told me. The rest of the session went rather well. In fact, two of the members said to me "I don't know what you said to Bob, but he's actually not too bad to be around anymore." I think he just needed to be scared into place a little :smalltongue:

Thank you everybody, your advice helped me out a lot. I really appreciate it! :smallbiggrin:

That's great. :smallbiggrin: I hope it keeps going well for you and your group.

[Arcanist]

I think he just needed to be scared into place a little :smalltongue:

Tyrant... :smalltongue:

[Firechanter]

Some faith in Humanity... restored. ;)

[Malak'ai]

Glad to hear everything turned out well Sandwich.
Always best if you can work things out in a calm manner like that. Now hopefully Bob can keep up with the honesty and grow to becoming a productive member of your group who you all can enjoy being around, both in a gaming situation and out.

[Keld Denar]

As I said...personal problems need to be worked out personally, not through passive-aggressive in-game dickery.

Glad everything worked out and you didn't have to escalate to get the father involved!

[ThiagoMartell]

Wow, that's good to know, man. Hope things continue improving.

*beep*

Oh, my Faith in Humanity gauge just went up by 1 point.