How to deal with a player who kills the campaign?

[Gwazi Magnum]

Currently we are in a D&D group of seven people, six players and a DM and we are reaching the end of our campaign.

After this we are dividing into two Groups because we found we function a lot better with less players.

Note: I can't explain this well without using their names (or a similiar descriptor) so I'll identify everyone by their first letter.

Currently our groups are the following...

1. DM = Player L
Players = Player T, Player E, (Free slot), (Free slot)

2. DM = Player E
Players = Me, Player Z, Player A

No Group = Player D

Now, there is a reason we have no set group for Player D.
This is because weekly our group will start getting very angry and start to argue at some point, and looking back every conflict that happens was triggered by Player D directly by complaining or his reaction to something Player L does that can be seen as trolling.

Now, Player D has issues where he outright hates Player L and never gets along with him. He get's a giant grin and evil look on his face whenever something happens at Player L's expense.

Player D also has issues with getting physically violent, trying to tackle players (only me atm, has threatened Player L as well though) when he is angry. And he get's angry at a number of things...

1. D&D that isn't easy
-If something is a challenge, so his character can't do whatever he wants and succeed, or he suffers a penalty or bad result he loses it. Infact he always want to be doing feats of epicness which he should not be able to do. To the extent his character intro was a cutscene where he lists a bunch of things he does (where if he rolled, he shouldn't of been able to pull off with a 20 even).

2. Not being the center of attention
-If his character is not in the center of the story, he is not happy. There are countless times where a player was given a plot related item and his instant reaction is to roll his pickpocket skill and yell "I take it!"

3. When he cannot roleplay
-There are times we need to divide for realism sake. For a recent example, half of our group went to town to sell all our loot while the other half set up camp. Since our loot was going to total up in over 1,000,000 gold, we obviously needed to roleplay the bartering out. But did need some people to stay behind for camp because we are currently waiting for soldiers to arrive (building an army for an endgame show down with the villain). Player D was one of the players left at camp.

Now, the people at the camp were still roleplaying, just without the DM. But Player D did nothing but complain and yell because he wasn't in the main thing, calling it unfair even though he once got an entire solo session before.
This caused him to come up and say "Hey guys, I'm going to join in and I'm not leaving". And the DM gave in letting him RP as a merchant because as he texted us during the time he RP'd as a merchant "He would go crazy if we didn't".

----------------------------------------

Now to be completely honest and straight-forward, he throws tantrums. They average 2-3 times per session and even though we have told him these are issues that are hurting the group he refuses to fix them. Rather he blames the campaign for being unfair, Player L for trolling (when this is an evil campaign I should add), or me for creating bosses on the DM's behalf for end-game that are actually difficult for people to kill like a boss should be.

So, as listed above we got two groups, one with free slots. One that doesn't.

So the answer in terms of where to fit him may be the one with free slots, but the DM of that group has outright not allowed Player D to join, and honestly it's for good reason. As detailed above Player D hates Player L and they don't know each other that well anyways (Player D was a friend of mine who I had invited to the d&d group as a token of good faith, everyone else really only knows him through D&D).

Also Player D constantly tries to get close to Player T who is the only girl in our group. She has expressed countless times she is not interested, and we have had to seperate him from her countless times as well. But he keeps trying to get close to her and has to be told many times "D! Get off of T's chair!".

So Player L's group wouldn't work at all, expecially with the numbers cut down.

Player D however doesn't want to be in the group much anyways, but wants to join the other group. When he first learned he wasn't going to be in he tried guilt tripping us saying he felt left out, that he was excited for it etc.

But it's designed to be a roleplay heavy and challenging campaign. And since he doesn't like challenge he will probably throw more tantrums. Plus he is not a skilled roleplayer, at all. Granted if lack of skill was the only issue we would simply help him with it, but he also not only constantly meta-games but tries to be the main roleplayer and take all the spot-light, by means such as getting mad when others get too much time to RP or by trying to steal plot devices.

So we're pretty much stuck at the choice of let him join and potentially kill the experience for the rest of the group, or tell him he can't join?

Player D is a nice guy and we don't want to hurt his feelings. But every week it has become increasingly hard for us to enjoy D&D with everything he does, and despite us trying to tell him there are issues he take it as a personal attack and continue to do them (normally even worse the next time).

Player E, the DM for the group we're questioning him joining has suggested me and him pull him aside, highlight one last time what the issues are and tell him that if they cannot be fixed by the time our current group ends then he can't join. And if he does manage to fix those issues for those sessions the he can join.

But we're only going to that if our group all agree's to be willing to let him in assuming they do fix themselves for the rest of the campaign.

But our concerns are there's only a few sessions left, potentially only 1 before the group ends so it may be long enough to tell if he's truly cut it out or not. We're also worried that he'll start again once the campaign ends. Plus we've had a few players (myself include) declare they are pretty much ready to quit the groups if all the conflict continues.

So really, we're at a loss of what to do.

Anyone here experience a similiar issue and have any idea how to deal with this?

[Fyermind]

I've let players go before several times. This sounds like one of those times. I have no room for people who aren't nice to other group members OOC. I have special problems with guys making girls uncomfortable. Bringing people into groups is something I try to do regularly. This might be a chance to introduce a friend to the game.

[ksbsnowowl]

He has earned his reward.

Tell him that you have asked him repeatedly to fix the disruptive behavior. He hasn't. He is not welcome in the next game.

He won't ever deal with his issues if he's never called on it with actual consequences.

I don't play with problem people; life is too short for that crap. Your gaming will be much more enjoyable without him, it sounds like.

[Laserlight]

Just to clarify: All the problems are caused by Player D, and you're wondering what to do?
I would think the answer is obvious.


Player D is a nice guy

According to the description you've given: no, he's not.

[Atomictao]

Player D also has issues with getting physically violent, trying to tackle players (only me atm, has threatened Player L as well though) when he is angry.



This is *not* okay.

[Drake2009]

drop him from the party on account of him acting like a small child and tell him to come back when he has had anger management classes.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I've let players go before several times. This sounds like one of those times. I have no room for people who aren't nice to other group members OOC. I have special problems with guys making girls uncomfortable. Bringing people into groups is something I try to do regularly. This might be a chance to introduce a friend to the game.

I suppose it would be a good time to introduce new people, assuming there is anyone else interested who we have yet to include. Though the one DM'ing the group that still has open slots is probably the least likely among us to welcome in new faces.


He has earned his reward.

Tell him that you have asked him repeatedly to fix the disruptive behavior. He hasn't. He is not welcome in the next game.

He won't ever deal with his issues if he's never called on it with actual consequences.

I don't play with problem people; life is too short for that crap. Your gaming will be much more enjoyable without him, it sounds like.

It probably would be more enjoyable, but we also know we'll all end up feeling ****ty if he we do have to let him go and end up hurting his feelings (which we most defelently will).


Just to clarify: All the problems are caused by Player D, and you're wondering what to do?
I would think the answer is obvious.

According to the description you've given: no, he's not.

He is typically a nice guy, but he has a bad temper and lacks patience at times.

I suppose I should bring it up cause it's relevant but the player does have Autism.

I don't want to use it as an excuse for his behaviour though because both me and Player L are also autistic. Infact, me and Player D were in the same therapy program for many years, Player D being pulled out early which is probably why he has the issues described here. But knowing him personally and being autistic myself, I know it's not a case of 'He's autistic and he doesn't know any better' but a case of 'He can help it but chooses to hide behind his autism as an excuse to not change it'.

[molten_dragon]

Currently we are in a D&D group of seven people, six players and a DM and we are reaching the end of our campaign.

After this we are dividing into two Groups because we found we function a lot better with less players.

Note: I can't explain this well without using their names (or a similiar descriptor) so I'll identify everyone by their first letter.

Currently our groups are the following...

1. DM = Player L
Players = Player T, Player E, (Free slot), (Free slot)

2. DM = Player E
Players = Me, Player Z, Player A

No Group = Player D

Now, there is a reason we have no set group for Player D.
This is because weekly our group will start getting very angry and start to argue at some point, and looking back every conflict that happens was triggered by Player D directly by complaining or his reaction to something Player L does that can be seen as trolling.

Now, Player D has issues where he outright hates Player L and never gets along with him. He get's a giant grin and evil look on his face whenever something happens at Player L's expense.

Player D also has issues with getting physically violent, trying to tackle players (only me atm, has threatened Player L as well though) when he is angry.

I stopped reading here.

This guy has gotten physically violent over a game of D&D, and you're not sure how to deal with him?

I'd have kicked him out of my house (or wherever the game was taking place) and told him not to come back the FIRST time it happened. If he came back anyway, I'd have called the cops.

Just get rid of the guy, period. He shouldn't be a part of either of your groups. He clearly has some serious anger management issues, and that's not the kind of person you want to hang around with.

[AuraTwilight]

He's attacked players in real life. That means let him go, no buts, no second chances.

[Peelee]

Player D is a nice guy

According to the description you've given: no, he's not.


This is *not* okay.
Both quoted for truth. My personal read of the situation - you may like him, but he's not a nice guy. I would have kicked him from any of my games, and hard, and if I weren't the DM, I'd have told the DM that if that dude didn't go, I would. Especially the second anything physical happens. It's supposed to be a game with friends. Unless your group of friends gets along and typically engage in physical antics, that should not fly.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I stopped reading here.

This guy has gotten physically violent over a game of D&D, and you're not sure how to deal with him?

I'd have kicked him out of my house (or wherever the game was taking place) and told him not to come back the FIRST time it happened. If he came back anyway, I'd have called the cops.

Just get rid of the guy, period. He shouldn't be a part of either of your groups. He clearly has some serious anger management issues, and that's not the kind of person you want to hang around with.

I agree with the anger issues.

But to clarify on the violence, he is not beating anyone.

At the worse he has charged and tackled, but very weakly too. And I believe this is a combination of that he is just not that strong to begin with and that he probably he restraining himself from actually harming somebody.

[Fyermind]

We all have our own reasons for retreating from reality into fantasy. But since we are choosing to share a fantasy, we have to be courteous of the people we want to share it with. I know the table is a sort of Utopia and it hurts to let that image slip by showing that you won't actually take anything from anyone at your table, but this is a game and you will get over it if you don't invite him back. One day he will too.

[Darius Kane]

I've kicked out players that were less disruptive. You really have no better choice than to simply not play with him.

[GnomeFighter]

You say he's violent and ask what to do? Get rid of him. If your feeling nice sit him down, clearly and politely explain what is not acceptable. Don't say "you did x" and "don't do Y". This just puts people's backs up. Clearly say that aggression and violence are not acceptable, it is a group thing, and play nice with player L. Then if he doesn't take it get him out. To be honest it sounds like its only a matter of time before he dose something violent.

[molten_dragon]

I agree with the anger issues.

But to clarify on the violence, he is not beating anyone.

At the worse he has charged and tackled, but very weakly too. And I believe this is a combination of that he is just not that strong to begin with and that he probably he restraining himself from actually harming somebody.

You're making excuses for this guy. I don't know if it's because he's your friend, or because you feel bad for him because he's autistic or what, but you're making excuses for him.

It doesn't matter whether he punched someone or 'weakly charged and tackled' them. He got violent over a game of D&D. Over a GAME. Normal people don't do that. Whoever this guy is, he's got some serious mental issues, and he's dangerous to be around. The fact that he's only gotten 'a little' violent doesn't change that.

If he's really your friend, and you really care about him, do whatever it takes to get him some help. Don't just assume he doesn't really want to harm anyone. Don't just assume it'll get better. Get him help. Do you want this guy to end up being the next Jared Loughner, or James Holmes, or Adam Lanza?

[ksbsnowowl]

It probably would be more enjoyable, but we also know we'll all end up feeling ****ty if he we do have to let him go and end up hurting his feelings (which we most defelently will).The guy is getting physically violent with people; your absolute LAST concern should be his feelings.

If any player in my house got physically violent with anyone else there, they would immediately be told to leave. If they refused... well, that wouldn't end well for them.

That crap doesn't fly, not at all.

[cosmicAstrogazr]

I know he's your friend, but I have to agree with everyone else here: he has to go. Getting physically violent over D&D is never okay. :smallfrown:

[Drake2009]

I suppose it would be a good time to introduce new people, assuming there is anyone else interested who we have yet to include. Though the one DM'ing the group that still has open slots is probably the least likely among us to welcome in new faces.



It probably would be more enjoyable, but we also know we'll all end up feeling ****ty if he we do have to let him go and end up hurting his feelings (which we most defelently will).



He is typically a nice guy, but he has a bad temper and lacks patience at times.

I suppose I should bring it up cause it's relevant but the player does have Autism.

I don't want to use it as an excuse for his behaviour though because both me and Player L are also autistic. Infact, me and Player D were in the same therapy program for many years, Player D being pulled out early which is probably why he has the issues described here. But knowing him personally and being autistic myself, I know it's not a case of 'He's autistic and he doesn't know any better' but a case of 'He can help it but chooses to hide behind his autism as an excuse to not change it'.

I have had many friends who are autistic and as you say its not a reason to be treated special. You are correct in the he can help it and I personally make less leeway for people with autism then normal people so they learn and dont "say tackle there boss when he tells them they arent in charge of the project or he doesnt get the promotion. I find it helps them learn and get over there problems. So you should be extra strict to those who have problems but can get over them.

[Unusual Muse]

It probably would be more enjoyable, but we also know we'll all end up feeling ****ty if he we do have to let him go and end up hurting his feelings (which we most defelently will).

This is what we call "enabling." Let him go; if you really want to do him a favor, help him grow by letting him learn that there actually can be consequences to his behavior, instead of continuing to protect him from himself.

[Callin]

I have to agree. Even with taking the tackling as a joke. They guy does not know how to act around people. What is the age group btw? Sounds like yall are fairly mature but he is acting like a kid in middle school.

[yougi]

Well I agree with everyone else: he shouldn't join. You'd feel guilty if he doesn't play? Well if he does, you'd feel guilty of ruining everyone's game. Plus, you'd have your game ruined.

However, I felt terrible when I asked for advice regarding my own problem players and all I got was "KICK HIM OUT". While I do believe he should not get his way, I'll still give advice as to how to include him.

I don't think people have taken the autism point as seriously as it should be. Suddenly, the girl being freaked out and the "light physical violence" seem less terrible. Still, like you said, "lightly" autistic (as in able to communicate with others) isn't a free pass to be a jerk, but it can mean he doesn't realize the consequences of what he's doing. I think you (or any member of your group) should talk to him about what he should change in order to join the game. No, he won't like it, but I think if you don't want to make him feel left out and don't want to talk to him about his issues, the best solution is to cancel the game: it's what's going to happen when he'll ruin it for everyone.

When he knows that he has a few things to improve on, tell him that you (plural you) will be there to support him through it. Maybe make a plan for it, like they do in schools (three strikes per session, third one you're out for the rest of the day) so he knows where he's standing. And actually enforce it. Also, make sure all players (including DM) are okay with this: it's their game time too, and if to them, it feels like a burden instead of a game, they won't enjoy it.

So yeah... Tough one.

[Unseenmal]

I agree. If you've tried to reason with him numerous times and he still does it, it's time to go. Especially with the physical attacks and pestering the girl player. That's one thing I will not abide. If he hit on her and she said no and he stopped, that's one thing. But to keep it up, now it's a scary/dangerous situation for her. You may hurt his feelings but....that's not your problem anymore. You didn't cause the situation, he did. Now he has to deal with the consequences. Maybe it will give him the wake up call he needs.

You can't save them all, Hasselhoff.

Sometimes you just have to cut a man loose.

[Gwazi Magnum]

We all have our own reasons for retreating from reality into fantasy. But since we are choosing to share a fantasy, we have to be courteous of the people we want to share it with. I know the table is a sort of Utopia and it hurts to let that image slip by showing that you won't actually take anything from anyone at your table, but this is a game and you will get over it if you don't invite him back. One day he will too.

I'm hoping that's the case. The last thing I want is to cause us to hate each other or anything like that.


You say he's violent and ask what to do? Get rid of him. If your feeling nice sit him down, clearly and politely explain what is not acceptable. Don't say "you did x" and "don't do Y". This just puts people's backs up. Clearly say that aggression and violence are not acceptable, it is a group thing, and play nice with player L. Then if he doesn't take it get him out. To be honest it sounds like its only a matter of time before he dose something violent.

He takes even slight hints as personal attacks however.
He'll put together that we're addressing aggression and violence, and the fact we've pulled him aside and then take it personally with his back against the wall anyways.


You're making excuses for this guy. I don't know if it's because he's your friend, or because you feel bad for him because he's autistic or what, but you're making excuses for him.

It doesn't matter whether he punched someone or 'weakly charged and tackled' them. He got violent over a game of D&D. Over a GAME. Normal people don't do that. Whoever this guy is, he's got some serious mental issues, and he's dangerous to be around. The fact that he's only gotten 'a little' violent doesn't change that.

If he's really your friend, and you really care about him, do whatever it takes to get him some help. Don't just assume he doesn't really want to harm anyone. Don't just assume it'll get better. Get him help. Do you want this guy to end up being the next Jared Loughner, or James Holmes, or Adam Lanza?

I wouldn't put it to that extreme.
I don't see him becoming any kind of violent criminal.
But that said, in the future if he's out on his own I could sadly see him getting aggressive at the wrong person when the stresses of stuff like taxes, a job etc come down hard on him.


I have had many friends who are autistic and as you say its not a reason to be treated special. You are correct in the he can help it and I personally make less leeway for people with autism then normal people so they learn and dont "say tackle there boss when he tells them they arent in charge of the project or he doesnt get the promotion. I find it helps them learn and get over there problems. So you should be extra strict to those who have problems but can get over them.

Oddly enough the therapy me and Player D used to be in used this same way of thinking. And it's correct, but noteworthy this is the same therapy he was removed from earlier. He was removed because he complained about it enough his parents removed him and put him into a more 'play to recover' therapy... which honestly has actually made him lower functioning, not higher functioning over the years.


This is what we call "enabling." Let him go; if you really want to do him a favor, help him grow by letting him learn that there actually can be consequences to his behavior, instead of continuing to protect him from himself.

I guess, although this is the most popular opinion in our group it is something none of us want to have to go through with.
But I guess some things do have to be done.


I have to agree. Even with taking the tackling as a joke. They guy does not know how to act around people. What is the age group btw? Sounds like yall are fairly mature but he is acting like a kid in middle school.

I'm in my first year of college.
Player A just finished doing half a year of Grade 13 (Victory Lap).
Player L is still doing a Grade 13 at the moment
Player Z is in Grade 12, but is as old as me, L and A, he's a year behind because of a 'High School Prep Year' his parents forced him into
Player E and T are in Grade 12
Player D (The one this topic is about) is in Grade 10.

[Wings of Peace]

Get rid of D.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Well I agree with everyone else: he shouldn't join. You'd feel guilty if he doesn't play? Well if he does, you'd feel guilty of ruining everyone's game. Plus, you'd have your game ruined.

However, I felt terrible when I asked for advice regarding my own problem players and all I got was "KICK HIM OUT". While I do believe he should not get his way, I'll still give advice as to how to include him.

I don't think people have taken the autism point as seriously as it should be. Suddenly, the girl being freaked out and the "light physical violence" seem less terrible. Still, like you said, "lightly" autistic (as in able to communicate with others) isn't a free pass to be a jerk, but it can mean he doesn't realize the consequences of what he's doing. I think you (or any member of your group) should talk to him about what he should change in order to join the game. No, he won't like it, but I think if you don't want to make him feel left out and don't want to talk to him about his issues, the best solution is to cancel the game: it's what's going to happen when he'll ruin it for everyone.

When he knows that he has a few things to improve on, tell him that you (plural you) will be there to support him through it. Maybe make a plan for it, like they do in schools (three strikes per session, third one you're out for the rest of the day) so he knows where he's standing. And actually enforce it. Also, make sure all players (including DM) are okay with this: it's their game time too, and if to them, it feels like a burden instead of a game, they won't enjoy it.

So yeah... Tough one.

Thanks for giving some advice that doesn't automaticly leading to kicking him out. We may try the three strikes thing (depends on how others feel). But we've got the issue of that this campaign is ending in a few sessions (tomorrow may be the last depending on how things go, we'll about ready to face the main villain) and once that happens we don't want to let Player D into the next groups only to possibly kick him out later.

[Callin]

So not much of an age gap and even with the disability at the age to know better.

Since he is not able to be singled out and confronted without going super defensive try talking to him with one of his parents there. Or even talk to one of his parents first to see how to go about it. If that is an option.

Honestly i would just kick him out of both groups. One its not fair to rest of the group for him to be disruptive like that. Two its not fair to you for the way you would feel for him being there and acting like that. Three its not good for him in the long run to just let him get his way and act like a spoiled brat.

[Drake2009]

I'm hoping that's the case. The last thing I want is to cause us to hate each other or anything like that.



He takes even slight hints as personal attacks however.
He'll put together that we're addressing aggression and violence, and the fact we've pulled him aside and then take it personally with his back against the wall anyways.



I wouldn't put it to that extreme.
I don't see him becoming any kind of violent criminal.
But that said, in the future if he's out on his own I could sadly see him getting aggressive at the wrong person when the stresses of stuff like taxes, a job etc come down hard on him.



Oddly enough the therapy me and Player D used to be in used this same way of thinking. And it's correct, but noteworthy this is the same therapy he was removed from earlier. He was removed because he complained about it enough his parents removed him and put him into a more 'play to recover' therapy... which honestly has actually made him lower functioning, not higher functioning over the years.



I guess, although this is the most popular opinion in our group it is something none of us want to have to go through with.
But I guess some things do have to be done.



I'm in my first year of college.
Player A just finished doing half a year of Grade 13 (Victory Lap).
Player L is still doing a Grade 13 at the moment
Player Z is in Grade 12, but is as old as me, L and A, he's a year behind because of a 'High School Prep Year' his parents forced him into
Player E and T are in Grade 12
Player D (The one this topic is about) is in Grade 10.
Oh you mean the "you did not even half of what a normal person is supposed to do! Here have candy and a party! Freakin hate those. I used to be in the learning center at school and honestly that schools learning center was just "put all the messed up kids in a room and let them do whatever they want and get candy for practically nothing!" I thought it was dumb being the kid who had already gotten over his anger issues and was just sitting and reading through the class but yeah... They didnt help the kids they showed them they are special and dont need to do there own work. Kinda annoying. (Worst part was when I thought about them eventually driving a car... :smalleek:) but thats how they did it and I got out of it plainly because I told my parents I am going to go insane and get my anger issues back if i stay there... and of course when they took me out the center said i needed to stay for blah when they were supposed to be helping me with blah the entire time but did nothing!

[molten_dragon]

I wouldn't put it to that extreme.
I don't see him becoming any kind of violent criminal.
But that said, in the future if he's out on his own I could sadly see him getting aggressive at the wrong person when the stresses of stuff like taxes, a job etc come down hard on him.

You're right, he probably won't go that extreme. However the point of bringing that up was to hopefully wake you up to the fact that making excuses and enabling this guy isn't helping you or him.

One of these days he's going to learn the lesson that his anger and aggressive behavior won't be tolerated by society at large. Better he learn it now, by being kicked out of a D&D group, than in a few years by losing a job because he went off on his boss or going to jail because he took a swing at a cop.

People need to learn that their actions have consequences. This guy is obviously a fairly high-functioning autistic, since he's able to take part in a game of D&D in the first place, so he's not immune from that lesson.

[Wings of Peace]

Thanks for giving some advice that doesn't automaticly leading to kicking him out. We may try the three strikes thing (depends on how others feel).

It's worth asking what makes these three strikes different than the entire campaign he's already had to prove he can function within the standard boundaries of polite human behavior.

[Gwazi Magnum]

So not much of an age gap and even with the disability at the age to know better.

Since he is not able to be singled out and confronted without going super defensive try talking to him with one of his parents there. Or even talk to one of his parents first to see how to go about it. If that is an option.

Honestly i would just kick him out of both groups. One its not fair to rest of the group for him to be disruptive like that. Two its not fair to you for the way you would feel for him being there and acting like that. Three its not good for him in the long run to just let him get his way and act like a spoiled brat.

Talking to his Mom was a suggestion brought up before hand by my own mother whose friends with her.
The plan was for the two of them to plan a time that the two of them and me could sit down and discuss what to do to fix the issue and/or ways for his mom to brace him for no more d&d.

That plan never ended up happening though. I might be able to talk to his Mom myself tomorrow when he comes to d&d, but pulling her aside for that amount of time may make him suspicious and if he overhears I would of just ignited another issue with him.


Oh you mean the "you did not even half of what a normal person is supposed to do! Here have candy and a party! Freakin hate those. I used to be in the learning center at school and honestly that schools learning center was just "put all the messed up kids in a room and let them do whatever they want and get candy for practically nothing!" I thought it was dumb being the kid who had already gotten over his anger issues and was just sitting and reading through the class but yeah... They didnt help the kids they showed them they are special and dont need to do there own work. Kinda annoying. (Worst part was when I thought about them eventually driving a car... :smalleek:) but thats how they did it and I got out of it plainly because I told my parents I am going to go insane and get my anger issues back if i stay there... and of course when they took me out the center said i needed to stay for blah when they were supposed to be helping me with blah the entire time but did nothing!

Yea, that kind of therapy.

Honestly he could of been doing a lot better today if he stayed in the original program that was strict on this kind of thing. But, he switched and now he tells everyone that he's fully recovered but still excuses anything he does with autism.


You're right, he probably won't go that extreme. However the point of bringing that up was to hopefully wake you up to the fact that making excuses and enabling this guy isn't helping you or him.

One of these days he's going to learn the lesson that his anger and aggressive behavior won't be tolerated by society at large. Better he learn it now, by being kicked out of a D&D group, than in a few years by losing a job because he went off on his boss or going to jail because he took a swing at a cop.

People need to learn that their actions have consequences. This guy is obviously a fairly high-functioning autistic, since he's able to take part in a game of D&D in the first place, so he's not immune from that lesson.

It's not he doesn't know better than to do something like take a swing at a cop.
But I can seem him doing it out of pure anger if he was ever pushed there.

[Jornophelanthas]

Clearly you like player D, and consider him one of your friends. However, really nobody wants him to be a part of these two new campaigns.

Here is my suggestion:

Create a third roleplaying group that is a solo adventure, with you DM-ing for him. He will enjoy being in the center of the spotlight all the time, and there will be no conflict with other players.
Furthermore, if you can be a firm DM who does not allow exceptions to the rules or the laws of logic in this campaign, you can still drive the point home that his actions have consequences. ("You said you would try X, even though I warned you it had a big chance of failure. You failed the check. No takebacks.") Yes, the fantasy world is his, but he still has to share it with you.

As an added bonus, if he wants to involve other people into "his" campaign, let him (but let him do all the inviting and/or convincing by himself). If he brings in anyone of his own accord, he may act more considerate towards them.

(None of the above would imply that you can't be a part of one of the other two campaigns, just that you would need extra time to schedule the solo campaign in addition to the "regular" campaign you will be playing in.)

(All of the above also assumes that you would enjoy this as well. If you wouldn't, don't take my suggestion.)

[Immabozo]

I have a very simple solution if you do not want to outright confront him. Make it appear to him that, after the current campaign ends, the group breaks up. If he is a "nice guy" but bad anger problems, hang out with him on the night D&D usually was. After a week or two delay from when the next campaign was SUPPOSED to start, get the group together minus him, without his knowledge, in a different location. Maybe even a different night.

This is not the preferrably option, but it is an option. Like someone else said, if no one makes him confront ACTUAL consequences, he wont mature. But if you are uncomfortable confronting him, there is still a work around.

[Stormageddon]

Time to sit him down and tell him that he is no long welcome at you table. It does not sound sound like it's going to get better, and you don't want to be there if he is going to hurt someone.

[FreakyCheeseMan]

So, half playing devil's advocate, half speaking as a mildly autistic and (hopefully formerly) disruptive player in real life...

A lot of it comes down to how altruistic you want to be. It clearly sounds like he has a lot of social issues, and his personal growth is not your responsibility; that being said, I imagine these games are good for him, at least if you're not too lenient. So, the rest of this advice is assuming that you're willing to take that upon yourself, at least in a degree - otherwise, yeah, kick him.

I wouldn't worry too much about the violence - I may be reading it wrong, but that sounds more like over-excited rambunctiousness to me, rather than outright rage. Especially if he isn't big/strong enough to really hurt someone accidentally, I'd let that slide. Let him know it's out of line, correct him when he does so, but it shouldn't be the biggest issue to you.

Mostly, I'd say talk to him, but not - not - as a group. From my own experience, being corrected on social matters is threatening enough as is; being outnumbered only makes it worse. Let whoever has the best rapport with him make the approach.

With regards to both the girl, just keep him in a different group, if at all possible. It sounds like he has a crush on her, and that just complicates things, and puts too much emotion on an already stressed situation. Same with the guy he has a problem with; baby steps are key here, let him learn to function around neutral, distant people, not ones he has strong emotional reactions to

Part of this depends on whether or not he's reached the point of knowing his behaviour is at fault and wanting to change. For me, there was an embarrassingly long period between realizing "Holy crap, I really am being an *******" and actually ceasing to be an *******. You get excited, you get defensive against people who get on your nerves, you over-extend yourself if you feel you're in a good position and get sulky and defensive if you feel you're in a bad one, you slip back into old habits... there are a lot of ways for a person who genuinely wants to change, to still fail to do so.

Anyway, assuming he's actually at that point - "My behaviour is wrong and I should change it" - my big focus would be on making it clear to him what specific things he's messing up on, without being too harsh. As someone who's gone through this myself, corrections can very easily be crushing - every one is a setback, a realization that you're not as close as you'd hoped; there's shame, there's embarrassment, and above all there's frustration., the feeling that you're back in that same pit you've been trying to dig your way out of. This is especially true when the issue revolves around a specific conflict - like with the one player he has a problem with.

Three things that will make such corrections go more easily:

First, get his permission. I've done this with my friends before - asked them to let me know when I'm stepping out of line, because I simply don't realize it. If you do this, you lessen the sense of powerlessness that he feels, and that makes things so much easier.

Second, give all corrections in private. Public shame was, at least for me, a pretty horrifying experience. Whenever you have to tell him something, do it in such a way that doesn't shame him in front of the other players, or give him that "Everyone's against me" sense.

Third, whenever you correct him, make sure he has some time afterwards to process. All of those reactions - anger, embarrassment, frustration - take some time to work through. I'd give them at the end of a game, not the beginning.

On the other hand, if he isn't at that point... I don't have a lot to say, except "Try your damndest to get him there." All of my previous kids-gloves advice goes out the window at that point; it's a remarkably hard lesson to learn, and there's no nice way to teach it. Make it clear that he can get better, that you want him to get better, but beyond that, let him have it.

[Stormageddon]

Ok so I posted above before I read that the player had autism, and is in the 10th grade. My brother has autism (high functioning), and pretty much acted the same way when we roled played with our friends as a teenager. He would kick holes in the wall when he didn't get his way, throw things (once cut open my friends little brother's hand with a rusty chair).

So I know what you are going through. Our solution was to stop playing with him, but that's when we were young.

My solution for you. You said you were in therapy together? Is he still in therapy? Could you talk to his therapist and maybe he/she might have a solution for you? Maybe he/she could intervene on his behavior?

[TuggyNE]

I'm a little surprised that the Five Geek Social Fallacies (http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html) hasn't yet been linked. It might have some useful background information.

[Phelix-Mu]

So, half playing devil's advocate, half speaking as a mildly autistic and (hopefully formerly) disruptive player in real life...

A lot of it comes down to how altruistic you want to be. It clearly sounds like he has a lot of social issues, and his personal growth is not your responsibility; that being said, I imagine these games are good for him, at least if you're not too lenient. So, the rest of this advice is assuming that you're willing to take that upon yourself, at least in a degree - otherwise, yeah, kick him.

I wouldn't worry too much about the violence - I may be reading it wrong, but that sounds more like over-excited rambunctiousness to me, rather than outright rage. Especially if he isn't big/strong enough to really hurt someone accidentally, I'd let that slide. Let him know it's out of line, correct him when he does so, but it shouldn't be the biggest issue to you.

Mostly, I'd say talk to him, but not - not - as a group. From my own experience, being corrected on social matters is threatening enough as is; being outnumbered only makes it worse. Let whoever has the best rapport with him make the approach.

With regards to both the girl, just keep him in a different group, if at all possible. It sounds like he has a crush on her, and that just complicates things, and puts too much emotion on an already stressed situation. Same with the guy he has a problem with; baby steps are key here, let him learn to function around neutral, distant people, not ones he has strong emotional reactions to

Part of this depends on whether or not he's reached the point of knowing his behaviour is at fault and wanting to change. For me, there was an embarrassingly long period between realizing "Holy crap, I really am being an *******" and actually ceasing to be an *******. You get excited, you get defensive against people who get on your nerves, you over-extend yourself if you feel you're in a good position and get sulky and defensive if you feel you're in a bad one, you slip back into old habits... there are a lot of ways for a person who genuinely wants to change, to still fail to do so.

Anyway, assuming he's actually at that point - "My behaviour is wrong and I should change it" - my big focus would be on making it clear to him what specific things he's messing up on, without being too harsh. As someone who's gone through this myself, corrections can very easily be crushing - every one is a setback, a realization that you're not as close as you'd hoped; there's shame, there's embarrassment, and above all there's frustration., the feeling that you're back in that same pit you've been trying to dig your way out of. This is especially true when the issue revolves around a specific conflict - like with the one player he has a problem with.

Three things that will make such corrections go more easily:

First, get his permission. I've done this with my friends before - asked them to let me know when I'm stepping out of line, because I simply don't realize it. If you do this, you lessen the sense of powerlessness that he feels, and that makes things so much easier.

Second, give all corrections in private. Public shame was, at least for me, a pretty horrifying experience. Whenever you have to tell him something, do it in such a way that doesn't shame him in front of the other players, or give him that "Everyone's against me" sense.

Third, whenever you correct him, make sure he has some time afterwards to process. All of those reactions - anger, embarrassment, frustration - take some time to work through. I'd give them at the end of a game, not the beginning.

On the other hand, if he isn't at that point... I don't have a lot to say, except "Try your damndest to get him there." All of my previous kids-gloves advice goes out the window at that point; it's a remarkably hard lesson to learn, and there's no nice way to teach it. Make it clear that he can get better, that you want him to get better, but beyond that, let him have it.



This. I wanted to say a lot, but this says most of it, and says it better. There is about 3-4 textbooks worth of stuff to say about the dynamics of a person somewhere on the autism spectrum in a highly social behavior like role playing.

While each individual is different, and I'm not really advocating shielding the player in question from knowledge of what he's doing, actual, effective communication with an autistic person often does not happen at the rate or with the efficacy that people not on the spectrum tend to expect from each other. It will be a large undertaking to continue to include him in some manner (even if in a totally separate campaign for just the OP and the player in question), but I think there is much to be said about the value of making an effort.

Will it solve your problem to remove him from the group? Yes. But it really doesn't solve the problem, which is that your friend has trouble in group situations. Exclusion, while it will try to teach a hard lesson, is probably not going to teach him anything, as understanding social dynamic and self-correcting behavior are two of the biggest challenges faced by many on the spectrum. Asking him to face this realization on his own may well be beyond him, and it is also unlikely to have a desirable effect on the relationship between the OP and the player in question.

I'd advise patience and listening to the suggestions that I quoted from FreakyCheeseMan. I don't envy the OP his complicated situation. Good luck.

[Phelix-Mu]

So, half playing devil's advocate, half speaking as a mildly autistic and (hopefully formerly) disruptive player in real life...

A lot of it comes down to how altruistic you want to be. It clearly sounds like he has a lot of social issues, and his personal growth is not your responsibility; that being said, I imagine these games are good for him, at least if you're not too lenient. So, the rest of this advice is assuming that you're willing to take that upon yourself, at least in a degree - otherwise, yeah, kick him.

I wouldn't worry too much about the violence - I may be reading it wrong, but that sounds more like over-excited rambunctiousness to me, rather than outright rage. Especially if he isn't big/strong enough to really hurt someone accidentally, I'd let that slide. Let him know it's out of line, correct him when he does so, but it shouldn't be the biggest issue to you.

Mostly, I'd say talk to him, but not - not - as a group. From my own experience, being corrected on social matters is threatening enough as is; being outnumbered only makes it worse. Let whoever has the best rapport with him make the approach.

With regards to both the girl, just keep him in a different group, if at all possible. It sounds like he has a crush on her, and that just complicates things, and puts too much emotion on an already stressed situation. Same with the guy he has a problem with; baby steps are key here, let him learn to function around neutral, distant people, not ones he has strong emotional reactions to

Part of this depends on whether or not he's reached the point of knowing his behaviour is at fault and wanting to change. For me, there was an embarrassingly long period between realizing "Holy crap, I really am being an *******" and actually ceasing to be an *******. You get excited, you get defensive against people who get on your nerves, you over-extend yourself if you feel you're in a good position and get sulky and defensive if you feel you're in a bad one, you slip back into old habits... there are a lot of ways for a person who genuinely wants to change, to still fail to do so.

Anyway, assuming he's actually at that point - "My behaviour is wrong and I should change it" - my big focus would be on making it clear to him what specific things he's messing up on, without being too harsh. As someone who's gone through this myself, corrections can very easily be crushing - every one is a setback, a realization that you're not as close as you'd hoped; there's shame, there's embarrassment, and above all there's frustration., the feeling that you're back in that same pit you've been trying to dig your way out of. This is especially true when the issue revolves around a specific conflict - like with the one player he has a problem with.

Three things that will make such corrections go more easily:

First, get his permission. I've done this with my friends before - asked them to let me know when I'm stepping out of line, because I simply don't realize it. If you do this, you lessen the sense of powerlessness that he feels, and that makes things so much easier.

Second, give all corrections in private. Public shame was, at least for me, a pretty horrifying experience. Whenever you have to tell him something, do it in such a way that doesn't shame him in front of the other players, or give him that "Everyone's against me" sense.

Third, whenever you correct him, make sure he has some time afterwards to process. All of those reactions - anger, embarrassment, frustration - take some time to work through. I'd give them at the end of a game, not the beginning.

On the other hand, if he isn't at that point... I don't have a lot to say, except "Try your damndest to get him there." All of my previous kids-gloves advice goes out the window at that point; it's a remarkably hard lesson to learn, and there's no nice way to teach it. Make it clear that he can get better, that you want him to get better, but beyond that, let him have it.



This. I wanted to say a lot, but this says most of it, and says it better. There is about 3-4 textbooks worth of stuff to say about the dynamics of a person somewhere on the autism spectrum in a highly social behavior like role playing.

While each individual is different, and I'm not really advocating shielding the player in question from knowledge of what he's doing, actual, effective communication with an autistic person often does not happen at the rate or with the efficacy that people not on the spectrum tend to expect from each other. It will be a large undertaking to continue to include him in some manner (even if in a totally separate campaign for just the OP and the player in question), but I think there is much to be said about the value of making an effort.

Will it solve your problem to remove him from the group? Yes. But it really doesn't solve the problem, which is that your friend has trouble in group situations. Exclusion, while it will try to teach a hard lesson, is probably not going to teach him anything, as understanding social dynamic and self-correcting behavior are two of the biggest challenges faced by many on the spectrum. Asking him to face this realization on his own may well be beyond him, and it is also unlikely to have a desirable effect on the relationship between the OP and the player in question.

I'd advise patience and listening to the suggestions that I quoted from FreakyCheeseMan. I don't envy the OP his complicated situation. Good luck.

[ZeroSpace9000]

I've actually had the ... displeasure of playing with someone who sounds very much indeed like your friend D, OP. The main difference is that you've stated D is in 10th grade, so roughly 16 years old, whereas the player in my case is actually pushing 30 now, if memory serves. Other than that, he was in many ways similar to D; complained about challenge, extremely defensive when confronted about his attitude, heck, he's even outright stated that he has anger issues.

I didn't realized it at first, because it really wasn't too bad then, but I now know that he has a very toxic personality. He has made little, if any, effort to improve his behavior, and frequently hides behind his Asperger's. Heck, he's even tried using that to force people to include him in games, on the basis that they're discriminating against him.

Ultimately, that person doesn't want to better themselves. And given that he's pushing 30, as I said earlier, I'm doubtful that that will ever change. Which is a bad thing for him, because from what I've heard, he's rapidly running out of groups where he's welcome, because people aren't dealing with his BS anymore.

If you want to continue to be friends with D, fine, that's your choice. But you need to stress to him that, from what I've gathered, people are getting sick of his BS. And they really shouldn't have to put up with that, since this is their spare time that is being disrupted.

I don't think anything short of a real rude awakening is likely to provoke a change in his attitude. If you truly want to help him, you need to do somthing now. Otherwise, he's just that much more likely to become stuck in his ways. Like my problem player, who I've long since banned from my games, D doesn't seem like he wants to get better. You need to show him what that really means.

[zlefin]

you called player D a nice guy near the end in summary, saying you don't want to hurt his feelings. He's not a nice guy, he is doing very unnice things on a very regular basis. If you wish to claim he's got good qualities, please provide them; all the description you've provided indicates that player D is toxic, and a bad person, who should be ejected from all the groups.

Is there any other reason you can't fully eject player D?

Player L sounds questionable; and it might be a better environment without him around as well; but that's less clear.

[zlefin]

I suppose I should bring it up cause it's relevant but the player does have Autism.

I don't want to use it as an excuse for his behaviour though because both me and Player L are also autistic. Infact, me and Player D were in the same therapy program for many years, Player D being pulled out early which is probably why he has the issues described here. But knowing him personally and being autistic myself, I know it's not a case of 'He's autistic and he doesn't know any better' but a case of 'He can help it but chooses to hide behind his autism as an excuse to not change it'.

Read through more of the thread after my initial response to read replies and comments of others.
This guy is a jerk, who should be ejected from the group. If your assessment here is correct, then by not trying and simply hiding behind his autism as an excuse (which he darn well knows he's doing); he's a jerk. Jerks get ejected; having disabilities does not preclude being a jerk.

[tomandtish]

This is because weekly our group will start getting very angry and start to argue at some point, and looking back every conflict that happens was triggered by Player D directly by complaining or his reaction to something Player L does that can be seen as trolling.


This could certainly use some clarification and zlefin touches on this. While physical violence is never a justifialble response to a verbal provocation, what is L doing? Is L trolling, or is it just D taking it that way?

If the former, you may have more than just one problem. Is L targeting D specifically? Or just because he's the easy target? (Because he'll give the "best" reaction). In that case, if D goes, what will L do then?

Again, the tackling and the behavior towards your female player needs to be addressed regardless, but L may be an issue as well, and could certainly use some clarification.

[Gwazi Magnum]

So, half playing devil's advocate, half speaking as a mildly autistic and (hopefully formerly) disruptive player in real life...

A lot of it comes down to how altruistic you want to be. It clearly sounds like he has a lot of social issues, and his personal growth is not your responsibility; that being said, I imagine these games are good for him, at least if you're not too lenient. So, the rest of this advice is assuming that you're willing to take that upon yourself, at least in a degree - otherwise, yeah, kick him.

I wouldn't worry too much about the violence - I may be reading it wrong, but that sounds more like over-excited rambunctiousness to me, rather than outright rage. Especially if he isn't big/strong enough to really hurt someone accidentally, I'd let that slide. Let him know it's out of line, correct him when he does so, but it shouldn't be the biggest issue to you.

Mostly, I'd say talk to him, but not - not - as a group. From my own experience, being corrected on social matters is threatening enough as is; being outnumbered only makes it worse. Let whoever has the best rapport with him make the approach.

With regards to both the girl, just keep him in a different group, if at all possible. It sounds like he has a crush on her, and that just complicates things, and puts too much emotion on an already stressed situation. Same with the guy he has a problem with; baby steps are key here, let him learn to function around neutral, distant people, not ones he has strong emotional reactions to

Part of this depends on whether or not he's reached the point of knowing his behaviour is at fault and wanting to change. For me, there was an embarrassingly long period between realizing "Holy crap, I really am being an *******" and actually ceasing to be an *******. You get excited, you get defensive against people who get on your nerves, you over-extend yourself if you feel you're in a good position and get sulky and defensive if you feel you're in a bad one, you slip back into old habits... there are a lot of ways for a person who genuinely wants to change, to still fail to do so.

Anyway, assuming he's actually at that point - "My behaviour is wrong and I should change it" - my big focus would be on making it clear to him what specific things he's messing up on, without being too harsh. As someone who's gone through this myself, corrections can very easily be crushing - every one is a setback, a realization that you're not as close as you'd hoped; there's shame, there's embarrassment, and above all there's frustration., the feeling that you're back in that same pit you've been trying to dig your way out of. This is especially true when the issue revolves around a specific conflict - like with the one player he has a problem with.

Three things that will make such corrections go more easily:

First, get his permission. I've done this with my friends before - asked them to let me know when I'm stepping out of line, because I simply don't realize it. If you do this, you lessen the sense of powerlessness that he feels, and that makes things so much easier.

Second, give all corrections in private. Public shame was, at least for me, a pretty horrifying experience. Whenever you have to tell him something, do it in such a way that doesn't shame him in front of the other players, or give him that "Everyone's against me" sense.

Third, whenever you correct him, make sure he has some time afterwards to process. All of those reactions - anger, embarrassment, frustration - take some time to work through. I'd give them at the end of a game, not the beginning.

On the other hand, if he isn't at that point... I don't have a lot to say, except "Try your damndest to get him there." All of my previous kids-gloves advice goes out the window at that point; it's a remarkably hard lesson to learn, and there's no nice way to teach it. Make it clear that he can get better, that you want him to get better, but beyond that, let him have it.



The other issue is that we're at a time limit now in a sense.

After my last post, most of my d&d group (everyone except player D and L) had came over to hang out. But we also discussed what to do about D and I directed them to this page to read the advice given before making any decisions.

Ultimately we decided to do the three strike thing, but differently. It's not three strikes for the session but three total. The current DM of our one big group player A confirmed there will be a total of three more sessions for our campaign. So the agreement is we play d&d tomorrow as usual, when that session ends me and player E pull player D aside and address the issues to him and that if they can't be fixed in the next two sessions then we can't let him in any other groups.

If he suffers three strikes in those two sessions he can't join, and if he does get by and join, those strikes stick around for a while so if they add up quickly in the next group he's simply removed from the group.


Ok so I posted above before I read that the player had autism, and is in the 10th grade. My brother has autism (high functioning), and pretty much acted the same way when we roled played with our friends as a teenager. He would kick holes in the wall when he didn't get his way, throw things (once cut open my friends little brother's hand with a rusty chair).

So I know what you are going through. Our solution was to stop playing with him, but that's when we were young.

My solution for you. You said you were in therapy together? Is he still in therapy? Could you talk to his therapist and maybe he/she might have a solution for you? Maybe he/she could intervene on his behavior?

He is still in therapy, the "Play to recover" therapy which does more harm than good to him. I stayed in another kind of therapy however (the one he left early) and that allowed me to fully recover/stop therapy at the age of 15 (I'm 19 now).

Seeing how his current therapy has done more harm for him than good, I doubt I could convince his therapist to do anything to help. More than likely I'd get an answer such as "It's just a game, just let him play and have fun!".

You know those types of people who live in a bubble, basically jumping in fields of flowers and vomiting rainbows?
His current therapist from what I've seen seem to be those kinds of people.


This. I wanted to say a lot, but this says most of it, and says it better. There is about 3-4 textbooks worth of stuff to say about the dynamics of a person somewhere on the autism spectrum in a highly social behavior like role playing.

While each individual is different, and I'm not really advocating shielding the player in question from knowledge of what he's doing, actual, effective communication with an autistic person often does not happen at the rate or with the efficacy that people not on the spectrum tend to expect from each other. It will be a large undertaking to continue to include him in some manner (even if in a totally separate campaign for just the OP and the player in question), but I think there is much to be said about the value of making an effort.

Will it solve your problem to remove him from the group? Yes. But it really doesn't solve the problem, which is that your friend has trouble in group situations. Exclusion, while it will try to teach a hard lesson, is probably not going to teach him anything, as understanding social dynamic and self-correcting behavior are two of the biggest challenges faced by many on the spectrum. Asking him to face this realization on his own may well be beyond him, and it is also unlikely to have a desirable effect on the relationship between the OP and the player in question.

I'd advise patience and listening to the suggestions that I quoted from FreakyCheeseMan. I don't envy the OP his complicated situation. Good luck.

I understand and appreciate the concern and sympathy that this all may be simply beyond his understanding. But being his friend for years, this is not beyond his understanding. He fully realizes that he is misbehaving, but he's also in the child's mindset of "It's not my fault! It was ________!".

But note worthy, he also has unrealisticly high expectations what he can handle.
For example, there was one session where his character died, and the DM told him that he would come back to life once the fight was over. Player D still stormed off the stairs and cried for hours... and this is not an exaggeration, we timed this.

But he'll claim that he can handle a game like Call of Cthullu no problem, and then throws a temper if someone highlights the previous example to him.


I've actually had the ... displeasure of playing with someone who sounds very much indeed like your friend D, OP. The main difference is that you've stated D is in 10th grade, so roughly 16 years old, whereas the player in my case is actually pushing 30 now, if memory serves. Other than that, he was in many ways similar to D; complained about challenge, extremely defensive when confronted about his attitude, heck, he's even outright stated that he has anger issues.

I didn't realized it at first, because it really wasn't too bad then, but I now know that he has a very toxic personality. He has made little, if any, effort to improve his behavior, and frequently hides behind his Asperger's. Heck, he's even tried using that to force people to include him in games, on the basis that they're discriminating against him.

Ultimately, that person doesn't want to better themselves. And given that he's pushing 30, as I said earlier, I'm doubtful that that will ever change. Which is a bad thing for him, because from what I've heard, he's rapidly running out of groups where he's welcome, because people aren't dealing with his BS anymore.

If you want to continue to be friends with D, fine, that's your choice. But you need to stress to him that, from what I've gathered, people are getting sick of his BS. And they really shouldn't have to put up with that, since this is their spare time that is being disrupted.

I don't think anything short of a real rude awakening is likely to provoke a change in his attitude. If you truly want to help him, you need to do somthing now. Otherwise, he's just that much more likely to become stuck in his ways. Like my problem player, who I've long since banned from my games, D doesn't seem like he wants to get better. You need to show him what that really means.

If he truly doesn't want to get better at all, even after we talk to him tomorrow then he won't be allowed to join any future D&D groups.


This could certainly use some clarification and zlefin touches on this. While physical violence is never a justifialble response to a verbal provocation, what is L doing? Is L trolling, or is it just D taking it that way?

If the former, you may have more than just one problem. Is L targeting D specifically? Or just because he's the easy target? (Because he'll give the "best" reaction). In that case, if D goes, what will L do then?

Again, the tackling and the behavior towards your female player needs to be addressed regardless, but L may be an issue as well, and could certainly use some clarification.

Player L has the tendency to be a troll of a player, on the group as a whole.

He does occasionally do things to annoy the group, throughout a year or so of d&d there's been two cases of team killing and 3 to 4 cases of stealing loot and/or side quest plot items (not main ones) from the group.

But this is also usually done in an IC way and is normally light hearted and taken relatively well by the group, rarely does he step over the line, and if he does he is normally very quick to scale back.

Player D is no specific target of his, but whenever Player L does act this way, even if it's very minor and doesn't bother anyone in the group, Player D will still get very angry over it and will either threaten him or throw a tantrum.

If D goes or not, L is going to be a DM of one of the two groups after this bigger group ends and when he's DM he does turn his troll side off completely.
However, assuming hypothetically he were to remain a player, he would keep his usual antics may player D be kicked out or not, but the difference being if player D was absent would that it would be taken more calmly and be used more for roleplaying than having it indirectly throw player D into a tantrum.

[Steward]

For what it's worth, I think you guys came up with a very fair and sensible solution, and I hope it works out for everyone involved. I can see both sides of this issue; D isn't a monster, but he hasn't completely got a grip on his behavior and when he gets worked up over the game he doesn't take the time to understand how his reactions affect others.

But the other players deserve to be able to enjoy the game too, and it's likely that they can't really do that if they have to walk on eggshells not knowing when one of the other gamers will (OOC) take something they do the wrong way and throw a tantrum.

Ultimately the boundaries do have to be set (in some form) though and the group seems to realize this. It's always sad when you have to exclude someone, but a system where he has a sporting chance to reform his behavior before it gets to that point is probably the kindest and fairest way you can do it.

[zlefin]

The other issue is that we're at a time limit now in a sense.
He is still in therapy, the "Play to recover" therapy which does more harm than good to him. I stayed in another kind of therapy however (the one he left early) and that allowed me to fully recover/stop therapy at the age of 15 (I'm 19 now).

Seeing how his current therapy has done more harm for him than good, I doubt I could convince his therapist to do anything to help. More than likely I'd get an answer such as "It's just a game, just let him play and have fun!".


If his therapy isn't helping him, I recommend contacting more people. Not just him and his therapist; but his parents, the therapist's superiors; and anyone in a position of authority to determine whether this is the right therapy for him or not (i'm sure there's some sort of case worker/officials/state boards/somebody at the state level).

There's often a lot of inertia; so things do get missed sometimes; reference these other people to this thread as well; if he can't learn to play well with others, others won't want to play with him; and play therapy won't work if noone's willing to play with you.

[molten_dragon]

It's not he doesn't know better than to do something like take a swing at a cop.
But I can seem him doing it out of pure anger if he was ever pushed there.

Well that's kind of the thing about being a grownup. Society doesn't care. That cop doesn't care if you knew better but you were just really angry (or drunk or high) and couldn't control yourself. You're still going to end up in a courtroom, and likely in jail.

It sounds like this guy has gone most of his life without people calling him on his bad behavior. I'm guessing people make excuses because of his autism, just like you are. The thing is, he's eventually going to run into someone who doesn't do that. And then he's going to learn that his behavior has consequences. And the longer he goes without learning it, the harder that lesson is going to be.

If kicking him out of the group permanently is completely unacceptable to you, I would try just sending him home any time he threatens or commits violence. No strikes, no multiple chances, just send him home, and tell him he can come back next week if he can behave then.

[ZeroSpace9000]

Having read a little bit more about the group dynamic, by which I mean having read about L, I would say that he is part of the problem here. True, D shouldn't be getting worked up about L's trolling, but L really ought to know better. When you have someone in the group that gets worked up about things as easily as D, and you know that this is the case, trolling him is going to get a reaction out of him, and it does have potential to be ugly.

In the event that D does remain in the group for whatever reason, talk to L too and make sure he lays off of him. This is not, in any sense, accommodating D's behavior, and more not provoking someone who has a hair trigger on their temper.


Getting back to D fully, I agree with the other posters in saying that you have been enabling his disruptive attitude. You've said that the therapy sessions he's undergoing are doing him more harm than good, given that they seem to be reinforcing his behavior. I agree, however I also feel that you are also not helping the matter, given how often you defend his behavior and rationalize what he does. Given his age, I would say that within 2 years of him becoming an adult, he will be sent to jail for either assault (the charging incidents) or harassment (his constant pestering of T). This is how people who have no prior knowledge about his are going to interpret his actions. The longer it takes you to tell him that how he's acting is unacceptable, the nastier this lesson is going to be.

You seem to be making an effort to try and get this into his head. Good. It's certainly a lot more effective than just explaining away what he does. Doing what you say his therapist is currently doing, as you've said, is only hurting him.

[yougi]

Thanks for giving some advice that doesn't automaticly leading to kicking him out. We may try the three strikes thing (depends on how others feel). But we've got the issue of that this campaign is ending in a few sessions (tomorrow may be the last depending on how things go, we'll about ready to face the main villain) and once that happens we don't want to let Player D into the next groups only to possibly kick him out later.

My pleasure! I feel like many people on this board either know waaaay too many people who play D&D, or never actually play, since their answer to anything is "Don't play with him".

"He's a jerk." -> "Don't play with him."
"He doesn't know his spells, and it's been 10 sessions." -> "Don't play with him."
"My DM doesn't allow Tome of Battle." -> "Don't play with him."
"He eats less then everyone, and doesn't want to pay as much as everyone else for the pizza." -> "Don't play with him."
"He kinda smells." -> "Don't play with him."
"Three weeks ago, he dropped a d4 on the floor and I stepped on it." -> "Don't play with him."
"Last session, we wore the same t-shirt." -> "Don't play with him."
"He said Monk is the best class." -> "BURN HIS HOUSE DOWN."



If kicking him out of the group permanently is completely unacceptable to you, I would try just sending him home any time he threatens or commits violence. No strikes, no multiple chances, just send him home, and tell him he can come back next week if he can behave then.



Ultimately we decided to do the three strike thing, but differently. It's not three strikes for the session but three total. The current DM of our one big group player A confirmed there will be a total of three more sessions for our campaign. So the agreement is we play d&d tomorrow as usual, when that session ends me and player E pull player D aside and address the issues to him and that if they can't be fixed in the next two sessions then we can't let him in any other groups.

If he suffers three strikes in those two sessions he can't join, and if he does get by and join, those strikes stick around for a while so if they add up quickly in the next group he's simply removed from the group.


Great that you worked things out! Just to clarify why I proposed the 3 strike per session thing: at the beginning, he'll probably go through them quickly, and leave, and come back next time: instead of rejected, it's mostly a time out thing. If he learns from it, then, he'll take them seriously, and eventually (hopefully quickly), he'll stop after his second strike. And eventually, you'll lower the number of strikes from 3 to 2, and he'll have to adapt, he won't be allowed to disrupt everything twice every week. 2 strikes already means "you get a warning, then you leave". I mean, that's what I do with my non-autistic friends when they start acting out.

Now, one thing to take into account is that I'm a teacher, and as such I think of how to make him improve, which is not your responsibility: you're running a D&D game, not a therapy program. I'm not trying to convince anyone, just to explain my point.

[molten_dragon]

My pleasure! I feel like many people on this board either know waaaay too many people who play D&D, or never actually play, since their answer to anything is "Don't play with him".

"He's a jerk." -> "Don't play with him."
"He doesn't know his spells, and it's been 10 sessions." -> "Don't play with him."
"My DM doesn't allow Tome of Battle." -> "Don't play with him."
"He eats less then everyone, and doesn't want to pay as much as everyone else for the pizza." -> "Don't play with him."
"He kinda smells." -> "Don't play with him."
"Three weeks ago, he dropped a d4 on the floor and I stepped on it." -> "Don't play with him."
"Last session, we wore the same t-shirt." -> "Don't play with him."
"He said Monk is the best class." -> "BURN HIS HOUSE DOWN."

While I agree that particular piece of advice gets tossed out a little too freely on here sometimes, you have to admit that in this case it's a pretty rational response to the situation.

[Za'hynie Laya]

There is some good advice in this thread. I hope you can help D without harming the rest of your gaming group. We all need that kind of a friend who will tell us, "I love you, but you cannot...<insert transgression>...to me/us." Only those close to D will know realistically what good behavior can be expected from him.
My gaming group had a similar issue with a problem drinker. By threatening to cancel the games, he sobered up some to accommodate the group. He left the group later, but in his absence we felt a huge burden was lifted off the gaming table.
I hope the resolution you've chosen brings peace to the table.

[The Glyphstone]

My pleasure! I feel like many people on this board either know waaaay too many people who play D&D, or never actually play, since their answer to anything is "Don't play with him".

"He's a jerk." -> "Don't play with him."
"He doesn't know his spells, and it's been 10 sessions." -> "Don't play with him."
"My DM doesn't allow Tome of Battle." -> "Don't play with him."
"He eats less then everyone, and doesn't want to pay as much as everyone else for the pizza." -> "Don't play with him."
"He kinda smells." -> "Don't play with him."
"Three weeks ago, he dropped a d4 on the floor and I stepped on it." -> "Don't play with him."
"Last session, we wore the same t-shirt." -> "Don't play with him."
"He said Monk is the best class." -> "BURN HIS HOUSE DOWN."
.



While I agree that particular piece of advice gets tossed out a little too freely on here sometimes, you have to admit that in this case it's a pretty rational response to the situation.

And considering that almost as often you get threads like "Help! One of my players brings a loaded shotgun to games and threatens anyone who won't give him all the loot and XP, literally skinned my new puppy in the middle of game and wore it as a hat, and never pays for his share of the pizza!", and you get people who say 'talk to him nicely outside of game and see if you can work something out', I think the entire body of advice comes out somewhere around neutral.

[yougi]

While I agree that particular piece of advice gets tossed out a little too freely on here sometimes, you have to admit that in this case it's a pretty rational response to the situation.

It always is! But it's much easier to talk about kicking out someone you don't know, who you've read about on the internet, than it actually is. Plus, when people describe their situations, they leave out most of the relationship they have with that person, which seems like all the person does is be a jerk.


And considering that almost as often you get threads like "Help! One of my players brings a loaded shotgun to games and threatens anyone who won't give him all the loot and XP, literally skinned my new puppy in the middle of game and wore it as a hat, and never pays for his share of the pizza!", and you get people who say 'talk to him nicely outside of game and see if you can work something out', I think the entire body of advice comes out somewhere around neutral.

Hehe, yeah, I guess so.

Oh, and it hadn't been done yet, so mandatory reference to Lanky Bugger.

[Themrys]

My pleasure! I feel like many people on this board either know waaaay too many people who play D&D, or never actually play, since their answer to anything is "Don't play with him".

I never actually play because I get kicked out of groups with the excuse of "We're not playing anymore" for no reason I know of, or maybe because I try to find excuses for the player they have a reason to kick out.

However, this:


Also Player D constantly tries to get close to Player T who is the only girl in our group. She has expressed countless times she is not interested, and we have had to seperate him from her countless times as well. But he keeps trying to get close to her and has to be told many times "D! Get off of T's chair!".

is obviously something where talking nicely doesn't help, since he has been told countless times already.

And it would cause me to leave the group.

I have silently endured some unwanted backslapping and the like for the sake of roleplaying, but the fun ends when I say I don't want it and the behaviour is continued nevertheless.

Autism is not an excuse. I have some tolerance for people who don't understand nonverbal cues, but people who cannot even behave at least tolerable if their needs are taken into consideration, are clearly not fit to interact with other people.

[danzibr]

You could also make a written list of unacceptable behaviors. Show it to him beforehand and have him agree to it. Keep it on hand. When he starts breaking a rule show him the list. Penalize him when he breaks a rule. This could be as mild or severe as you wish. Could say first violation and he's banned for good, or maybe just 5 minutes of silence.

Edit: Oh right, if you feel this is singling him out and don't want to do that, have everyone agree and be subject to the rules.

[Threadnaught]

Can't use the autism card, I am. I DM and the only time I have anger issues is with my very own problem player. Same people here know who I'm referring to, for everyone else, I'll give you the nickname I use for him in D&D forums in this spoiler.

That ****ing Druid (he's playing as a Druid right now)

Yeah, that guy. He usually spends his time in game making me want to smack him for reminding me of rules I've just checked, demanding more power and treating me like an idiot. Decent guy otherwise, but when he becomes annoying, he's really annoying.

Your guy sounds like even more of a pain in the ass for the DM and the players. My advice would be to sit him down and let him know exactly what the group doesn't like about his behaviour and to have a specific seating arrangement so everyone knows exactly where they're sitting. With nobody allowed to leave their seats unless for certain obvious reasons.
He should be allowed to be as much of a **** he wants to be in the game (provided the DM and other players allow it), he may even be allowed to be a **** toward the other players' characters, but he must not be allowed to be a jerk toward the other players. And most importantly, the game must be fun for everyone, if one person is stopping everyone else from enjoying themselves, they must be cut loose, no "if"s, no "but"s.


For anyone wondering, no I'm not a hypocrite (at least not in this case), my game's fun, the three of us manage to enjoy ourselves. No need to kick anyone, just the occasional chat about my role.

[Morphie]

Talk to him and send him away, if he likes D&D he can play Baldurs Gate and NWN on his computer, that way he won't be left out of anything, he can be the star all of the time.
Maybe without him you'll be able to play in a single group of 6 elements (5+DM sounds ok), if the number of players is the real issue.

If he stays he'll ruin the whole purpose of the game - to have fun - and, as much as you think of him as your friend, he's being a jerk and needs to know his actions have consequences.

Good luck :)

[tadkins]

I'm a little surprised that the Five Geek Social Fallacies (http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html) hasn't yet been linked. It might have some useful background information.

This was an interesting read.

I have GSF1 so bad.

[Wings of Peace]

Can't use the autism card, I am. I DM and the only time I have anger issues is with my very own problem player...

Agreed. The biggest issue with taking the autism card into account in the OP's case is that by using it to excuse/justify some of the behavior the group still remains at it's same level of unhappiness.

Any solution being considered should be weighed based on it's effect on the group's happiness rather than on it's sentimental or sympathetic merits because any other solution is going to end in the group being still unhappy. And if this group is something that'd good for D and that's a reason that the group doesn't want to break up (I'm hypothizing here) then the result will -still- be near universal group unhappiness.

The reason I'm saying these things is because when I read this thread I feel like a lot of the reasons for wanting to help D are that he's not "really a bad guy", he's "having a hard time" etc. These aren't bad reasons but they're also not innately problem solving outlooks (I say innately because the desire to help someone can be motivational to thought). I don't know what the answer to this situation is but my advice to the OP would be to break down the big objectives for what this gaming group is supposed to be for D as well as all other people involved and use those as scales to weigh the various options.

[facelessminion]

You have said he's violent, that the whole group dislikes him, yet you are still asking what to do in the situation. I can't help but think that you're a victim of your own kindness and tolerance, here.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I'd just like to say thank you everyone for all you're great advice and the time you took to help out.

But sadly how events unfolded last night it's doubtful we'll be able to use them now.

Allow me to explain.

Yesterday Player Z and L never showed up, Z had family commitments, L has no explanation.

Player T and E showed up around 8 (when the group normally starts around 2-4) but both had given warnings long before hand and told us to start without them.

However, this left just me, The DM and Player D by ourselves for a while, and being near the end of the campaign we didn't want to keep going with 4/6 players missing.

By the time Player T and E arrived, we figured we should drop D&D for the night and play a board game. We ended up playing Mage Knight.

However, Player D lost badly. Where is fame (Victory Points) ended up reaching the negatives for how wounded he was. He was already about to throw a tantrum from this alone and started to yell things such as "Well I did better than you!" and all I did was point to the victory point board to show otherwise and this sent him into the most violent mode we've seen him yet. Where I had to push him back to avoid personal injury, and when I did he simply charge again even harder the next time.

The DM yelled loud enough for Player D to stop and he left soon after. This means me and Player E never got our chance to tell Player D about the 3 strike rule.

So as we discussed as a group, Player T and the DM were of the mindset that "He was in a bad mood today, we should wait for next week before putting in the 3 strikes plan, I can prolong the campaign if need be to give him time".

But my reaction to that was that if we needed to wait several weeks to even talk to him about the issue again and put the 3 strikes in place then it was useless because there is no way he would follow it anyways. And with Player D's behaviour I've had to take the stance 'The needs of the many out weight the needs of the few' so I couldn't allow a campaign we're trying to end soon to be dragged out and campaigns we want to start to be delayed simply because Player D can't control himself.

Player E didn't share my same reasoning but was concerned that since his group (The only one Player D had a chance to join due to this issues with Player L whose going to be the other DM afterwards) was planning for heavy challenge, which is exactly what caused Player D to freak out today that it was not a good idea at all.

So...

TLDR: Player D had his biggest tantrum and degree of phyiscal aggression yet, to the point we couldn't even put our plan into place. So we've ended up ultimately deciding that Player D will not be able to continue to play D&D with us once our current group (which has 1-2 weeks) left is over.

-Though, Player E did state that Player D may be allowed if Player D can give a damn good reason he should stay, but he's expressed that Player D will most defelently not be able to give any good reason. Probably going straight for a tantrum and not give a reason period outside of the tantrum.

[ZeroSpace9000]

I will admit, I'm not terribly surprised that it came to this. Ideally, you shouldn't have had to deal with a blowup like that at all, but you made an effort to at least be the better man by including him, so I can't really fault you there.

And for what it's worth, in all likelihood the quality of your groups sessions will be much improved with him gone. And D himself will hopefully learn a lesson about consequences from this. If something can come of this blowup for him, then it's not all bad. Unfortunately, with my read on him, he'll likely just assume that you all were in the wrong here. It's what I perceive to be 'the easy way out'.

That bit I mentioned, about how he's unlikely to want to change? It ties into the 'easy way', since it's easier to assume that the problem lies with someone else; it's very difficult to accept that you have a problem. It's like an addiction like that; addicts are frequently in denial about their addiction, and claim they can quit anytime.



Wow, I got all psychology-rant-y there. Point to take is, it was likely going to get worse before it would get better, and it did. Hopefully, things improve from here. Sorry to hear things went south, best wishes that they get better quickly.

[molten_dragon]

TLDR: Player D had his biggest tantrum and degree of phyiscal aggression yet, to the point we couldn't even put our plan into place. So we've ended up ultimately deciding that Player D will not be able to continue to play D&D with us once our current group (which has 1-2 weeks) left is over.

-Though, Player E did state that Player D may be allowed if Player D can give a damn good reason he should stay, but he's expressed that Player D will most defelently not be able to give any good reason. Probably going straight for a tantrum and not give a reason period outside of the tantrum.

Sorry you weren't able to work it out any other way, but I kind of suspected that was going to be the outcome.

Unfortunately, another one of those hard lessons that everyone learns at some point is that there are some people who have problems you can't fix, and the only thing you can do is remove them from your life, so that their problems don't become your problems.

Hopefully things will improve for the rest of the group and you'll be able to enjoy yourselves a little more.

[yougi]

I'm actually surprised. Not "OMG THERE'S A DINOSAUR IN MY HOUSE" surprised, but still, didn't see THAT coming. It sucks when things come to an end on such terrible terms, but at least now that (hopefully) cleared your conscience.

[ZeroSpace9000]

I'm actually surprised. Not "OMG THERE'S A DINOSAUR IN MY HOUSE" surprised, but still, didn't see THAT coming. It sucks when things come to an end on such terrible terms, but at least now that (hopefully) cleared your conscience.

Sounds like you haven't had to do with someone like this before, yougi. Here's hoping that you never have to. My best guess on why this happens, is that the person in question sees a case where they are not, in fact, winning with style as somewhere between the other people being dirty cheaters, and just trying to spite him/her. It's taken as a personal attack. It's them just being so bloody entitled. Really, it's all of these things rolled into one. This phenomenon is actually kinda hard to articulate well.

Think of the first time you've ever lost a game. Specifically, how it felt. Now imagine that it wasn't a fair win; the other person cheated. Add in a sense of superiority, like you shouldn't have lost, and toss in a little bit of teenaged hormones into the mix. That's kinda what it's like for D, I'm guessing.

I don't know if I can explain the why of it any better. It's just a gut read on my part, probably honed by experiencing something very similar myself. OP, just be very glad that D didn't have anything like a pocketknife on him. My own ex-player did, and along with his alleged threats (didn't hear them personally, they were relayed to me) and description of his Hulk-like fits of rage, and I wanted no part of that garbage.


And on an unrelated note, it's annoying trying to abide by GitP's zero-tolerance for profanity. It feels even like words such as 'poopyhead' aren't allowed.

[Callin]

Sucks to hear dude.

[yougi]

Sounds like you haven't had to do with someone like this before, yougi. Here's hoping that you never have to.

I actually deal with autistic kids daily, and some of them are violent, some of them aren't. They very rarely, especially after teenage, go from non-violent (which D is, from what I get, not by a normal-person-standard, but from an autism standard, that is, he doesn't aim to hurt) to violent (trying to just) on the spur of the moment.

I mean, I wasn't expecting it to work, but I wasn't expecting a beatdown either.


Think of the first time you've ever lost a game. Specifically, how it felt. Now imagine that it wasn't a fair win; the other person cheated. Add in a sense of superiority, like you shouldn't have lost, and toss in a little bit of teenaged hormones into the mix. That's kinda what it's like for D, I'm guessing.

I mean, whenever I lose at a game, it's because others cheated, as I'm just so good at every game. I fail to see your point.

[Gwazi Magnum]

It wasn't a 'beat down'.

I have no bruises or anything on me.
He simply tried charging and tackling.

Thankfully he is not only very weak and lacks any kind of balance, but he has no idea how to use his strength at all outside of flat out tackles/charges.

But still, the force could of hurt me if I chose to not react (but I did).

[Gwazi Magnum]

I actually deal with autistic kids daily, and some of them are violent, some of them aren't. They very rarely, especially after teenage, go from non-violent (which D is, from what I get, not by a normal-person-standard, but from an autism standard, that is, he doesn't aim to hurt) to violent (trying to just) on the spur of the moment.

I mean, I wasn't expecting it to work, but I wasn't expecting a beatdown either.



I mean, whenever I lose at a game, it's because others cheated, as I'm just so good at every game. I fail to see your point.

Out of curiousity, where is it that you deal with autistic kids daily?

Player D's issue with losing games and not being the center wasn't an issue when he was a little kid, it is more a habit he developed as he got older.

May this be a result of him simply getting older or a result of the new 'therapy' he went to that is very much 'play to recover' I'm not sure.

My money's on the therapy playing at least a big role in it. Expecialy since they seem to follow the same philosophy as ECE (Early Childhood Education), which the college program I'm currently in.

At least with ECE, games like musical chairs aren't allowed because it encourages 'competition' and 'I win' attitudes, so they only ever do games where everyone wins.

The issue here though which they fail to address is that when said children get older they'll now lack the tools they need to handle a situation in which it is win/lose or someone does indeed do better than someone else.

So Player D, has probably gotten so used to the 'everybody wins' mindset that he can't handle it at all when he does lose or is in a case where even if you're on the same team, someone is clearly doing better or has more of a role than you. Example, Player L is handed a plot relevant item, he is now of a higher role of importance than Player D and all the others for a certain amount of time. Players D's reaction? Rolls dice and yelling "I take it!".

[thatryanguy]

While it's probably too late to contribute anything to this situation, I'd say that the only real way to get him to fix the way he's acting would be a combination of previously mentioned things.

1: Get together a list of unacceptable behaviors. Not like "don't be a ****" but specific things he does that are disruptive or rude. Don't specifically call him out on these actions, and don't include examples of when he's done them, make it as neutral as possible. Include reasons as for why these behaviors are unacceptable. How they make people feel/react, etc.

Email the list to him/everyone, and then set up a get together in a day or two, to go over the list with him in person once he's had the chance to read it on his own. Address his questions/concerns. Explain that the list is not just for him, that the behavior listed won't be tolerated from anyone in the group, autistic or not, because it goes against basic social courtesy. Let him know that anyone who does not agree to follow these rules will be asked to leave the group.

2: Explain/implement the 3-strikes thing, on both a by-session, and permanent basis. If he's kicked out of 2 sessions, a 3rd means he's never welcome back - He needs to understand and agree to this.

3: In order to help him follow the rules, set him up to succeed, not fail:
- Create a mandatory seating arrangement, and make sure that D and T sit at opposite sides of the table.
- Communicate to L that trolling, while the humor is generally appreciated, should be avoided while D's there unless it legitimately doesn't make sense for his character to Not act that way. However, if not being allowed to joke about doing things he isn't actually doing would ruin his own fun, perhaps a gesture that everyone in the group could use to signify that they're BSing, so that D isn't given the chance to misinterpret intent and react.
- Suggest that D bring a stress ball or set up a punching bag or something; if his anger issues cause him to need to lash out, try to redirect that energy. He cannot be allowed to think that striking people, however ineffectually, is in any way acceptable or tolerable.
- In situations where he needs to be excluded from the RP temporarily, try to find other ways he can participate off to the side, like designing a map for the town they're in (needs to be x size, have y number of shops, needs z features), or something else that falls within his interests.

As others have said already, you've clearly given him plenty of chances to better try and keep himself in check, so the time for all this may well be long passed. However, if you and your group are willing to continue being the shining examples of patience and understanding that you have been to this point (legitimate lack of sarcasm), what I mentioned above may be the best option for ensuring everyone's future enjoyment.

[Larkas]

I don't have much to add (that hasn't already been added, anyways) except this: try not to engage D in competitive activities. Card games, fighting videogames, RPGs (you're not competing in the strictest sense, but in his mind, you're competing for screen time), anything he might feel threatened about. You're his friend, and it seems like you really want to make him feel welcomed: take him and a few other friends to see some movies, go take a night out at a bar hang out in a cafeteria, etc. You can socialize with him, but it seems like you shouldn't put him in a situation where he feels pressed against a corner. You already said that he won't be welcomed at the new tables: make it clear to him that it was his behavior that put him there, but don't push it, and preferably don't abandon him. Maybe he can learn from his mistakes and not be ostracized at the same time.

I can't claim to have specific experience with anything equivalent, but my gf does have some anger management issues; otherwise, she is a wonderful person. The solution? I avoid competitive activities including her, since she does have some pretty intense reactions. So no RPGs, fighting games, games with PvP content... It is a pity, she loves RPGs, but, as a DM, it is very hard for me to plan a game with her: if I don't threaten her character, I'd be unfair to the other players, if I threaten and, if by any chance I score a critical hit or otherwise kill her character outright, I know exactly how she'll feel and will want to react (she won't actually react the way she feels like, but I could see it in her face that she would be holding back to not cause everyone else grief). I'd rather watch some movies and/or play some co-op games with her and our friends instead.

[yougi]

Out of curiousity, where is it that you deal with autistic kids daily?

I'm a teacher, so at work. To be fair, I don't see them on the week ends, so it's not actually a daily thing! :smallbiggrin:

[Karoht]

When I had a problem with a player, I have found that a 1-campaign break sometimes helps.

So basically, you tell the player about the problems that are occuring, and rather than forcing anything to a conclusion (IE-you better behave or else X will happen) you just inform the player that the rest of the group would like a 1-campaign break away from the player. The player is welcome to return after the next campaign. Sometimes, the time away from the group is a good thing.
It helps if you keep that upcoming campaign shorter.

[darklink_shadow]

I've read your entire thread.

Here is my thoughts.

You're coddling him, knock it off. If he acts poorly, he shouldn't be given excuses for his behavior. He should be reprimanded. If you continue to coddle him, he will never mature. You're enabling this behavior by not making the punishments for it dire enough.

My fr


Tablet died hours ago. Not going to try to finish this thought. Posting as is.

[Gwazi Magnum]

While it's probably too late to contribute anything to this situation, I'd say that the only real way to get him to fix the way he's acting would be a combination of previously mentioned things.

1: Get together a list of unacceptable behaviors. Not like "don't be a ****" but specific things he does that are disruptive or rude. Don't specifically call him out on these actions, and don't include examples of when he's done them, make it as neutral as possible. Include reasons as for why these behaviors are unacceptable. How they make people feel/react, etc.

Email the list to him/everyone, and then set up a get together in a day or two, to go over the list with him in person once he's had the chance to read it on his own. Address his questions/concerns. Explain that the list is not just for him, that the behavior listed won't be tolerated from anyone in the group, autistic or not, because it goes against basic social courtesy. Let him know that anyone who does not agree to follow these rules will be asked to leave the group.

2: Explain/implement the 3-strikes thing, on both a by-session, and permanent basis. If he's kicked out of 2 sessions, a 3rd means he's never welcome back - He needs to understand and agree to this.

3: In order to help him follow the rules, set him up to succeed, not fail:
- Create a mandatory seating arrangement, and make sure that D and T sit at opposite sides of the table.
- Communicate to L that trolling, while the humor is generally appreciated, should be avoided while D's there unless it legitimately doesn't make sense for his character to Not act that way. However, if not being allowed to joke about doing things he isn't actually doing would ruin his own fun, perhaps a gesture that everyone in the group could use to signify that they're BSing, so that D isn't given the chance to misinterpret intent and react.
- Suggest that D bring a stress ball or set up a punching bag or something; if his anger issues cause him to need to lash out, try to redirect that energy. He cannot be allowed to think that striking people, however ineffectually, is in any way acceptable or tolerable.
- In situations where he needs to be excluded from the RP temporarily, try to find other ways he can participate off to the side, like designing a map for the town they're in (needs to be x size, have y number of shops, needs z features), or something else that falls within his interests.

As others have said already, you've clearly given him plenty of chances to better try and keep himself in check, so the time for all this may well be long passed. However, if you and your group are willing to continue being the shining examples of patience and understanding that you have been to this point (legitimate lack of sarcasm), what I mentioned above may be the best option for ensuring everyone's future enjoyment.

1. We'd have to get the list together at the session, he doesn't use email (and to be honest, neither do I). Also he'll probably catch on this is on his behaviours specifically, even if he implement it for everything and end up taking it as a personal attack. Plus it's only 1-2 sessions left before we change campaigns, not much time to get such a list working.

2. Like stated above, 1-2 sessions left. If he needed to be kicked out of three sessions that guarantee's him a spot in the next campaign where he get's a foothold in it and has an even worse reaction if told he can't continue in the group. That or our current group get's pro-longed. Which although is something the DM as offered to do, I'd rather the rest of the group have to wait even longer for future groups they want to do simply to accomidate one player who has driven several members to almost quitting the group or d&d as a whole.

3.
-We've tried seating, he keeps moving over even when told not to.
We've tried communicating to L, but he doesn't change. His reaction is pretty much "Problem?"

-However, he is not purposely trying to anger Player D, he just doesn't allow Player D's reactions to prevent him from doing what he would typically do (and typically be accepted and often enjoyed) in a d&d group.

-When Player D get's angry it is directed as a specific player, he will blame this player and attack them for it. It's not general anger he happens to unleash on nearby people. He is focused on a specific person who in his eyes is to blame for the situation.

-We've also tried giving them other things to do. Hell, that time we RP'd where he wasn't involved, the other players also not involved began roleplaying themselves and he could of joined in on that. But since it wasn't the 'main roleplaying' going on, he didn't settle for it.

I honestly do not like having to kick him out, and might be more willing to try this advice if not for last week.
But not only have players been getting to agitated I felt the need to take the stance 'needs of the many beats the needs of the few' but he has actually became a physical danger from last week.


I don't have much to add (that hasn't already been added, anyways) except this: try not to engage D in competitive activities. Card games, fighting videogames, RPGs (you're not competing in the strictest sense, but in his mind, you're competing for screen time), anything he might feel threatened about. You're his friend, and it seems like you really want to make him feel welcomed: take him and a few other friends to see some movies, go take a night out at a bar hang out in a cafeteria, etc. You can socialize with him, but it seems like you shouldn't put him in a situation where he feels pressed against a corner. You already said that he won't be welcomed at the new tables: make it clear to him that it was his behavior that put him there, but don't push it, and preferably don't abandon him. Maybe he can learn from his mistakes and not be ostracized at the same time.

I can't claim to have specific experience with anything equivalent, but my gf does have some anger management issues; otherwise, she is a wonderful person. The solution? I avoid competitive activities including her, since she does have some pretty intense reactions. So no RPGs, fighting games, games with PvP content... It is a pity, she loves RPGs, but, as a DM, it is very hard for me to plan a game with her: if I don't threaten her character, I'd be unfair to the other players, if I threaten and, if by any chance I score a critical hit or otherwise kill her character outright, I know exactly how she'll feel and will want to react (she won't actually react the way she feels like, but I could see it in her face that she would be holding back to not cause everyone else grief). I'd rather watch some movies and/or play some co-op games with her and our friends instead.

We've tried socializing with him outside of D&D.

But if it's not D&D or video game related he get's bored very quickly and calls his Mom to pick him up. Plus, he hates anything that involves walking or moving around a lot. Maybe if we drove, but it still usually is not something he will ever be that interested in.

Only time it actually worked as at a game store, and he shot down most of the games offered because (His words, not mine) "Our group has a tendancy to get very angry when we're competiting against one another" when infact it's just an issue with him. At least he's aware that some games cause conflict, but he still fails to relise it's his reaction that makes it not work, not the groups fault as a whole.

+You seem to be a very good and caring boyfriend then, which I respect highly. :)


I'm a teacher, so at work. To be fair, I don't see them on the week ends, so it's not actually a daily thing! :smallbiggrin:

Cool.

Before I started in college I worked in autism therapy for a while.
I helped, I'm not professionally trained yet (Hence college) so I never actually took head charge of therapy sessions or anything like that.


When I had a problem with a player, I have found that a 1-campaign break sometimes helps.

So basically, you tell the player about the problems that are occuring, and rather than forcing anything to a conclusion (IE-you better behave or else X will happen) you just inform the player that the rest of the group would like a 1-campaign break away from the player. The player is welcome to return after the next campaign. Sometimes, the time away from the group is a good thing.
It helps if you keep that upcoming campaign shorter.

Maybe, but that means the rest of the players are willing to end the group early (which is unlikely, especially if it's to reintroduce a player that causes so many conflicts).

[Jornophelanthas]

I will repeat my advice from earlier in the thread, as I still believe it can be a decent solution if all parties involved (i.e. you and player D) are willing to dedicate time to it.

Play a solo roleplaying game with him, i.e. one player (him) and one DM (you).

Advantages:
- Player D still gets to roleplay;
- The other players no longer have to play around Player D's issues;
- You can sell it to Player D as an alternative for not being a part of the group anymore;
- Player D will not seek conflict, because he is the only player to receive the DM's attention;
- Player D might actually learn to deal with adverse situations if the DM enforces realistic rules interpretations (e.g. "I jump across the river." "You can't jump that far.") and does not pander to Player D's every whim. (Important: DO NOT allow him to play more than one character at the same time, because this would take away this entire point.)
- If presented well, your friendship with Player D need not suffer as a result of ending his involvement with the roleplaying group.

Requirements:
- FIRST AND FOREMOST, you need to be willing to make such a commitment, including the extra time it would require.
- Player D needs to be convinced it will be fun.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I will repeat my advice from earlier in the thread, as I still believe it can be a decent solution if all parties involved (i.e. you and player D) are willing to dedicate time to it.

Play a solo roleplaying game with him, i.e. one player (him) and one DM (you).

Advantages:
- Player D still gets to roleplay;
- The other players no longer have to play around Player D's issues;
- You can sell it to Player D as an alternative for not being a part of the group anymore;
- Player D will not seek conflict, because he is the only player to receive the DM's attention;
- Player D might actually learn to deal with adverse situations if the DM enforces realistic rules interpretations (e.g. "I jump across the river." "You can't jump that far.") and does not pander to Player D's every whim. (Important: DO NOT allow him to play more than one character at the same time, because this would take away this entire point.)
- If presented well, your friendship with Player D need not suffer as a result of ending his involvement with the roleplaying group.

Requirements:
- FIRST AND FOREMOST, you need to be willing to make such a commitment, including the extra time it would require.
- Player D needs to be convinced it will be fun.

It is a nice idea, but I don't have the time to invest in a seperate d&d group just for Player D.

Plus, my personal DM style makes things challenging for players, and Player D doesn't react well to that.

When he is forced to deal with realism too (for example, his character cannot just 'activate this sneak skill' in the open and be fine) he could react.

Also, he just cannot roleplay... at all. He was improving originally but the second he was told he was improving, he stopped and went backwards. Despite being told many times that he could still use some work.

Not that creative either, infact his character for a long time was Tordek, ripped directly off of the PhB examples. Then there's his current character Eve, who is a direct rip off of a Changeling Rogue I made and scrapped a few sessions later.

There was also cases where he tried to involve spaceships... in a medieval only campaign. Plus for Eve's intro he cutscened it... for example

"I jump onto the stage from the roof with a backflip impaling two guards on my swords. Then I leap into the air cutting the victim free from the execution rope and throw smoke bomb, I run through the crowd and jump kick another guard..."

Sadly our current DM although amazing at making good NPCs and roleplay experiences, does not enforce realism too much, and doesn't like to make any player angry or hurt (even if said player is reacting for no good reason what so ever) and allowed this to go through.

When in actuality what Player D did should of gone like...

"I jump onto the stage from the roof with a backflip...."

"Make a Jump Check (DC 30)"

*Rolls 13, total 24*

"You don't manage to stick the landing and break your ankle"

And that is where he would probably start complaining and eventually throw a tantrum if his ankle isn't magically fixed...

tldr: Even if I had the time to DM a campaign just for him (which I don't) if I made it anything but "do whatever the hell you say you can do Player D" it would quickly turn into a tantrum and physical danger to myself with no other players around to help out.

[Jornophelanthas]

Also, he just cannot roleplay... at all. He was improving originally but the second he was told he was improving, he stopped and went backwards. Despite being told many times that he could still use some work.

This I found most telling. I'm not a mental healthcare specialist in any way, but to me it sounds like he has been conditioned that it's okay to stop putting in any effort as soon as he receives a compliment for it. Is this a trend in his behaviour? If so, it might be worth pointing out to his parents / legal guardians.

Other than that, perhaps what he likes most about the roleplaying game in general is this:


Sadly our current DM although amazing at making good NPCs and roleplay experiences, does not enforce realism too much, and doesn't like to make any player angry or hurt (even if said player is reacting for no good reason what so ever) and allowed this to go through.

This sounds very much like the "everyone is a winner" therapy you mentioned him being the victim recipient of. Is he addicted to positive reinforcement, and can his tantrums be equivalent to symptoms of withdrawal from positive reinforcement?

[Threadnaught]

If you absolutely want to involve him in further role playing games, then this one thing may do wonders for him. Give him responsibility, make him the DM and let him know in no uncertain terms that he is supposed to challenge and entertain his players.

Make him understand that even if his players slaughter all his favourite monsters, every time the players enjoy themselves counts as a victory for him, but in the end he can't win by beating the players.


Of course, it would be better to wait for these two campaigns to finish first and to avoid involving Mr L. If it works, you'll have another possible DM to play with and he'll learn to be a part of the group.
If it doesn't, then drop him.

[Juntao112]

What's this I found in the GITP archives? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23784)

[Gwazi Magnum]

This I found most telling. I'm not a mental healthcare specialist in any way, but to me it sounds like he has been conditioned that it's okay to stop putting in any effort as soon as he receives a compliment for it. Is this a trend in his behaviour? If so, it might be worth pointing out to his parents / legal guardians.

Other than that, perhaps what he likes most about the roleplaying game in general is this:



This sounds very much like the "everyone is a winner" therapy you mentioned him being the victim recipient of. Is he addicted to positive reinforcement, and can his tantrums be equivalent to symptoms of withdrawal from positive reinforcement?

It's not overly common, d&d is the only example off the top of my head I can think of where a compliment caused him to just stop. Then again, although I've seen this new therapy's style, it was at one or two situations, not nearly enough for me to tell if this is a common case for him in therapy.

Though if I were to theorize, it sounds plausible that their 'everyone is a winner' mindset probably allowed Player D to complete any task with little to no skill and/or effort and still be rewarded for it simply because he is doing something, and their philosophy seems more on putting big smiles on everyone's faces than doing anything to help them in the long run anyways.

-----

As for our DM, he tries to run that fine line between 'It's a fantasy adventure for fun' and 'Think of this realistically' but he leans more towards the 'It's a fantasy adventure' side of it.

However this normally isn't a problem, he is fairly realistic with his adventures typically. The issue is if he tries nearly the amount of realism with Player D he does with anyone else... Tantrums etc happens.

And he really doesn't like seeing a player that upset or any conflict or anger arising in the group. So in a sense he is going easy on him because he doesn't want him to be hurt, and doesn't want to cause another conflict/issue within the group.

And this honestly has been the campaign biggest flaw/handicap. Fear or truly exploring or being realistic because of how Player D may react.


If you absolutely want to involve him in further role playing games, then this one thing may do wonders for him. Give him responsibility, make him the DM and let him know in no uncertain terms that he is supposed to challenge and entertain his players.

Make him understand that even if his players slaughter all his favourite monsters, every time the players enjoy themselves counts as a victory for him, but in the end he can't win by beating the players.


Of course, it would be better to wait for these two campaigns to finish first and to avoid involving Mr L. If it works, you'll have another possible DM to play with and he'll learn to be a part of the group.
If it doesn't, then drop him.

He has actually stated many times that he wishes to be a DM and thinks he'd make a good one.

If you were there, in our group it would be plainly obvious why he would make a horrid DM.

But to try to explain it on here since you haven't had the chance to see what he's like:

-If we got creative and cleared an adventure quickly, instead of being happy for us and/or being creative himself (and he is not that creative with d&d at all as my earlier post detailed) but would get angry that we just tossed aside something he set up to quickly.

-He would also get too much of a plan in place as for what 'he' wants to happen and what he wants us to face etc. And in the unavoidable that we choose to do something else or go somewhere else... Tantrums etc.

[Coec]

It sounds like you really want to try and keep him included because your friends. I think in the overall scheme of things, if you want to continue playing with him, maybe set aside a solo adventure for just you two. You being the DM and he being the SOLE Hero. Then you can continue to playing with your group and he gets the satisfaction of being center of attention. Its clear that he can't be with the others in a game.

Another thought would be to have your parents talk to his parents. Maybe even while your running the last adventure. Also does he know that you guys are continuing to game after this campaign is over or does he believe that this will be the end with no continuation? If he knows then reread the first paragraph, but if he doesn't then leave him out. He won't know so why would it hurt his feelings.

[Darius Kane]

Try pointing player D towards PbP. Maybe he's more suited to text-based roleplaying.

[Gwazi Magnum]

What's this I found in the GITP archives? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23784)

That, was a fun read.

But also a very messed up case.
Yet oddly enough, that DM got driven off by the police for doing far less than what Player D has done.


It sounds like you really want to try and keep him included because your friends. I think in the overall scheme of things, if you want to continue playing with him, maybe set aside a solo adventure for just you two. You being the DM and he being the SOLE Hero. Then you can continue to playing with your group and he gets the satisfaction of being center of attention. Its clear that he can't be with the others in a game.

Another thought would be to have your parents talk to his parents. Maybe even while your running the last adventure. Also does he know that you guys are continuing to game after this campaign is over or does he believe that this will be the end with no continuation? If he knows then reread the first paragraph, but if he doesn't then leave him out. He won't know so why would it hurt his feelings.

I replied to a suggestion like this in an earlier post.

It's just one or two posts ago if you want to read that one yourself.

Otherwise: Basically I detailed I can't solo because I don't have the time too.
And even if I did he would either be a completely bland/dull RP because he's doing whatever 'he thinks he should be able to do' without complaint, or he would get just as big a tantrum again and be violent (towards me) without other players to break it up because I'm actually being realistic with the campaign.

---

For the parent to parent advice. I tried because his Mom and my Mom are friends. But she keeps stating that I should be the one to talk to his Mom. The best she can do is call and ask for her and then switch the phone to be so Player D doesn't wonder why I'm talking to his Mom and not him.

He is fully aware however of that there are campaigns taking effect after this one ends.


Try pointing player D towards PbP. Maybe he's more suited to text-based roleplaying.

He has shown interest to forum roleplays, and I can direct him to a site called The Roleplayers Guild if he really wants to.

But...

1. I wouldn't be joining in, due to lack of time and I stopped forum RPs years ago
2. The Moderators on the site are strict
3. Not everyone is that friendly on the site
4. Forum roleplays are as team based as anything else.
Even if he found others who just wanted to do anything they wanted with no realism involved. There would still be the pushing for the spotlight issue going on.

[Darius Kane]

1. I wouldn't be joining in, due to lack of time and I stopped forum RPs years ago
Didn't say you should.


3. Not everyone is that friendly on the site
You can roleplay here too. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3) Or on Minmaxboards. (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=20.0)


4. Forum roleplays are as team based as anything else.
Then he can try solo.

[Larkas]

That, was a fun read.

But also a very messed up case.
Yet oddly enough, that DM got driven off by the police for doing far less than what Player D has done.

That is... A really messed up case. Did you read the follow-ups by Lanky? The guy returned, broke his window, got arrested and yelled at the police that he would kill "him". All because, Lanky later found out, apparently he didn't like the manga-style drawing a lady friend of Lanky's made on his character sheet.

... I just hope this ended well. Lanky got a restriction order, but hasn't been seen in these boards since 2007.

[Gwazi Magnum]

Didn't say you should.


You can roleplay here too. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3) Or on Minmaxboards. (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?board=20.0)


Then he can try solo.

Forum Roleplay's require a second player unless if you're just typing to yourself though.

The other sites might work though.


That is... A really messed up case. Did you read the follow-ups by Lanky? The guy returned, broke his window, got arrested and yelled at the police that he would kill "him". All because, Lanky later found out, apparently he didn't like the manga-style drawing a lady friend of Lanky's made on his character sheet.

... I just hope this ended well. Lanky got a restriction order, but hasn't been seen in these boards since 2007.

No I didn't read the follow-ups, didn't know there were any.

I'll have to go back and read those now.

[Andreaz]

According to the description you've given: no, he's not.He can well be a nice guy and a monstrously horrible player :p

Either way he's out.

[Darius Kane]

Forum Roleplay's require a second player unless if you're just typing to yourself though.
Um... Solo roleplay means there's one DM and one player. No team involved. :smallconfused:

[Gwazi Magnum]

Um... Solo roleplay means there's one DM and one player. No team involved. :smallconfused:

Oh, you mean d&d on forums.

Sorry I thought you meant the kind of RPs called forum roleplays.

Forum RP... not entirely sure on how he'd like it.

But he'd probably find it too slow paced, and if not I still imagine him getting furious when faced with realism and challenge.

Though, at least the DM is protected from any physical danger.

[Threadnaught]

If he's already displayed an absolute inability to DM, among everything else, then I think he's just a lost cause and beyond the help of anyone here.