Problem Player: The "Other" DM

[fatbaby]

Please help me out here guys. I'm a fairly new DM, but I have jumped in feet first and gained a lot of experience very quickly. I have a good grasp on the rules (7/10), and I try to run a fair campaign. I am currently running 2 different homebrew campaigns. I will break down the situation.

Titan's Ascension

My first campaign ever, a fellow DM and I agreed to run a 4 part campaign from lvl 1-20. I took the first part, he took the second, I take the third, he takes the last. Each part is a different element: earth, fire, water, air. I feel it is a good way to get used to DM'ing. When he DM's, I play my character and his character, and vice versa. Problem is, he is used to older editions, and also likes to make up some of the rules to his liking. However I don't agree with his rulings. Example: His tiefling rogue has an opposable tail that can grip things, like the edge of a cliff if he misses his 1st Dex save, giving him a second chance. I think this is unfair to other PCs, but I can't make him see this. I notice other unfair advantages for his character, like a +3 rapier and wings of flying at level 5, but if I bring them up he says they were rolled randomly and assigned randomly via loot generator. No one else has any legendary weapons, etc and we're now level 9.

Now more importantly is that our disagreements on the rules, and differences in DM styles often leads to contention between us while playing. He interrupts me while I am DMing to tell me I am wrong, whether RAI, or rules as he chooses to interprets/invents them. Or while he DMs I have to stop him to express a huge flaw in logic, or economy of movement, or ability checks, etc. Example: We are walking the desert in some sort of demiplane of the Plane of Fire (but not the actual Plane of Fire). Its 120-130 degrees. However, no matter how often we rest, or how often we hydrate, we have to make two CON checks per day to avoid exhaustion. Except his character, because a tiefling his PC is immune to fire, and thus heat. This means almost every encounter is played with a severe disadvantage for most PCs.

Sometimes the disagreement is settled quickly, other times it becomes a full on argument. Other members of the party are starting to voice to me their issues with this. From what I am told they err on my side commonly because I back up my points with information from the PHB or common real world knowledge. I have also had a player quit coming because of this dissension.

Sorry so long-winded. Just wanted to give a fair explanation before asking advice. I need help. Should I give in and let him dictate the game? Should I put my foot down? Should I walk away? Should I ask him to walk away? The worst part is he is a good friend and I don't want D&D to drive a stake between us. D&D is supposed to bring friends together! Thanks for any advice.

[Asmotherion]

The real question is, is everybody having fun with it? From what you say, I think not.

I've had to face similar situations in games, were a DM would make a PC, and overshadow all the other characters.

The solutions to this are simple:

A) Talk to him about the problem. You are playing together to have fun together. If he wants to emphasise his character, he can play alone, at home. I personally steped out of games like this, and eventually all other players did as well, leaving his campain to himself.

B) Tell him that he's basically making a Mary Sue. Give him an example by randomly telling him that your character was secretly a ancient gold dragon shapeshifted into your character (you decided upon it while you were DMing the first part). After he tells you that's stupid, ask him how it made him feel. And tell him that it's exactly what he's doing to the other players the way he DMs. If he does not, actually get to be an ancient gold dragon as soon as you DM, just to teach him a lesson about how bad it feels to be overshadowed by a DM PC. Also, grand equal bonuses to the other PCs (like legendary items) wile he gets non, due to "bad rolls at the loot table".

C) Ask him to step down from DMing as you think you can handle the situation better. Otherwise, ask him to either componsate the other PCs, or (better) stop giving ridiculous advantages to his PC, and play more of a suport role.

Personally, I sometimes do include a DM PC in my campains. I however always make sure he's just there to share the action, and either provide a suport role, or simply fade in the backround in a battle (such as fighting separatelly from the rest of the group, blocking more minions coming in from interfearing with the fight, but always let the real fight/Boss fight to the PCs)

[Alejandro]

Wait for the next time you get to play his Mary Sue character, then give the magic items away to other PCs? :smallsmile:

[fatbaby]

Alejandro - I have really thought about that lol! Problem is, he is a rogue, and his bonds are "gold is happiness". It would be completely OOC for him to give away ANYTHING lol. I can't find it in me to roleplay poorly, especially when I emphasize roleplay so much when I am DM'ing. :(

Asmotherion - Thanks for the advice man. We all still have a good time, except when the arguments break out lol. The antics get a bit funny sometimes honestly. I may have to Mary Sue a bit, that's not a bad idea.

[Alejandro]

Stop gaming with him and find or start a different group. He's just using the game as a personal power trip, likely to make up for some other personal inadequacy. All the signs are there.

[Finback]

We are walking the desert in some sort of demiplane of the Plane of Fire (but not the actual Plane of Fire). Its 120-130 degrees.

You're in Australia in summer? *ba-dum tissss*

That being said, as others note, try to explain to him that he is unfairly skewing the game to suit himself, and it makes it hard for you to maintain the game's level of enjoyment for *everyone* (including you) if he feels the need to perpetually skew any risk away from his character (why not just have his character retire then, to a life of comfort, if he's so terrified of them falling off cliffs or marching through deserts) and if he continues to debate rulings with you.

Secondly, consider finding another game. This then shifts the onus onto him - because he's probably going to end up ONLY being the DM, or being the DM who has a precious snowflake character who everyone is soon going to get sick of.

[Knaight]

So the situation is that he's trying to take over the game you're running better. I'd just go with running something else where he isn't a DM, and avoiding co-DMing with him in the future.

[ST By Night]

Firmly but gently exercise the power of 'no'.

"I appreciate your input, but we're going to do it this way."

That one line has solved a lot of problems for me.

[GorogIrongut]

The next time you're DM'ing, just do a reset. Players need to understand that their equipment isn't permanent, it's not always going to be there.

Your reset could be an overwhelming force that captures and disarms them. They find themselves unconscious and butt naked on the road. It could be a campaign where the BBEG has been breeding new strains of Rust Monsters.

The possibilities are endless... you're not showing bias by just taking away his kit... but because he overstacked his character, he's the one who loses the most. The other players in the party may just throw you a party for taking away everyone's stuff.

As for the tail, there are two things you should be doing.
1. If he's THAT visible of a tiefling, he should have massive minuses in social circumstances. I certainly hope you've had village folk chasing him with pitchforks on at least one occasion, preferably more. Everyone else in the party should refer to him as 'Demon'.
2. I have a winged variant tiefling in the campaign I run. Stopping him flying is actually pretty easy. Put him in places where he can't unfurl his wings. I mention this in tandem with the tail because YOU are the one who controls the difficulty levels of ability checks and saving throws. His 'extra' dex check with his gripping tail should be at a lot higher than his standard check. He should never be able to wield a weapon with it. Unless he can provide you with a realistically drawn picture/fully converted model, the tail is too weedy and thin to do anything but support minor weights. This means that he can't hang down from it without the risk of spraining/damaging it. Put him at disadvantage if he's wearing armour.

And most importantly... do what I do with my tiefling. Constantly mention how lucky he is that (insert whatever act of derring do that just occurred and that he didn't perform well) he didn't have one of his wings/tail ripped off. In the case of your guys tail, he should be catching it under all kinds of crazy stuff, like wagon wheels... horses hooves.

Right now he's treating it like a bonus... when really, it should be a small, characterful bonus with a whole host of negatives to compensate.


YOU are the DM. That means you're in charge when you're DM'ing. Don't give him numbers to meet. Don't allow him any opportunity to interpose what he wants to happen. Just tell him to roll and then tell him the result. Your word is law.

Sure, it sounds like he's being a dufus... but it also sounds like you need to be more confident... more assertive.

There's always the chance, he'll try and take it out on your character. If he does, have fun with it. Some of the most fun characters are sub optimal ones (great for roleplaying). Let him vent his spleen while you have a blast. You could use the DM animus as an excuse to label your character the most unlucky person in existence. And then go out of your way to give him a whole host of lucky charms, routines, etc... that he considers necessary to follow because they worked for him just once. While DM'ing continue being unfair to your character while being played by the dufus.

[lonewulf]

Im going to go with a different answer here.....you are BOTH in the wrong. Neither of you should be interrupting the others DM session with your complaints. If you or he dont like what the other is doing then TOO BAD....those complaints can wait until AFTER the session is over.

Im not going to tell you to talk to him privately after the next session....im going to tell you that your entire group should sit down and explain what you DO like and what you DONT like about his DM sessions. Dont make it all about the negatives but make sure every single player voices their concerns....and then have them do the exact same thing to YOU...maybe they arent as happy with your DMing as you might think they are.

Bottom line, this sounds like issues that affect the group as a whole and should be discussed as a group. It will either help you all get along and learn a thing or two...or it will make you realize that this isnt working and disband the potentially volatile group. Thats my 2cents, ignore my advice or dont...entirely up to you.

[dickerson76]

...He interrupts me while I am DMing to tell me I am wrong, whether RAI, or rules as he chooses to interprets/invents them. Or while he DMs I have to stop him to express a huge flaw in logic, or economy of movement, or ability checks, etc...

IMHO, you can't complain about his actions and then do the same thing yourself. I advise no longer co-DMing and just each run your own thing. After several sessions, switch between the two different stories at natural stopping points if you each want a chance to play.

[Knaight]

IMHO, you can't complain about his actions and then do the same thing yourself. I advise no longer co-DMing and just each run your own thing. After several sessions, switch between the two different stories at natural stopping points if you each want a chance to play.

This. I skimmed a bit and didn't notice you doing it, but if you're alternating DM duties then when you're not the DM you need to stop backseat DMing. Neither of you have proven able to do that.

[JNAProductions]

OOC problem, OOC solution. I've said it before, I'll say it again.

Talk to him. That's the best way to resolve it without hard feelings.

[Douche]

OOC problem, OOC solution. I've said it before, I'll say it again.

Talk to him. That's the best way to resolve it without hard feelings.

Yeah, this. It's pretty clear you've identified the problem. Just need to voice it to him.

[Herobizkit]

Yeah, this is a sure case of DMPC abuse.

The OP and his partner DM need to make some kind of agreement regarding treasure allocation. I'd suggest that a DM's character cannot earn treasure in play unless the the rest of the group agrees it would be a 'fair share' for said character.

Also, if the DM asserts that his tiefling has a prehensile tail, it's safe to assume that all tiefling have prehensile tails. If not, I's suggest that the DMPC invest a feat or have an alternate racial trait for it. I'm not sure is the SCAG has a prehensile tail as an alt racial trait, but it's not SO unreasonable (Pathfinder tieflings have it, for example); suggest trading one of the tiefling's "regular" traits for the ability to use his tail as a bonus action to grab stuff. Granting advantage on a fall check is actually pretty clever, but a bit cheap that the DM used it on his own DMPC.

[JackPhoenix]

How is the tail supposed to grab an edge of a cliff? It doesn't have any structure suitable for that, it would grab things by wrapping itself around them. How do you wrap relatively short tail around cliff edge?

Alternatively "You grab overhanging branch with your tail. However, the tail isn's strong enough to support the weight of your body and equipment. You can let yourself go (I won't require check for that) or the tail gets ripped of (take 1d6 damage) and you continue your fall anyway. It slowed you just enough that the fall would count as 10' shorter."

[Spellbreaker26]

You could always drop in a few weaknesses for that tail. Perhaps it's a weak spot if it's grabbed. Perhaps he turns into a giant ape if he looks at the full moon.

[Vogonjeltz]

This. I skimmed a bit and didn't notice you doing it, but if you're alternating DM duties then when you're not the DM you need to stop backseat DMing. Neither of you have proven able to do that.

I disagree somewhat; It's ok to challenge on a point of order, going for clarification by saying that the rules operate in a particular way.

This gives the DM the opportunity to either say: Oh, I was mistaken and didn't mean to deviate from the ruleset we agreed to use OR Oh, well, I meant to call it as an audible this time/every time, but thank you for the heads up.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with trying to determine the correct answer in a rules situation.

As for the other DMs behavior, it looks pretty lopsided and ridiculous to me, especially giving themselves legendary equipment and nonsense mechanical advantage. I wouldn't tolerate it were I you.

[Spiderguy24]

This guy sounds like he wants his character to be the star and overshadow everyone. As a DM, you need to put the kibosh to that, and put it on him hard. Having him as a co-dm doesn't help unfortunately, especially if he's making up rules on the fly, rather than discussing and establishing house rules before the campaign or session starts.

[Tawmis]

This guy sounds like he wants his character to be the star and overshadow everyone. As a DM, you need to put the kibosh to that, and put it on him hard. Having him as a co-dm doesn't help unfortunately, especially if he's making up rules on the fly, rather than discussing and establishing house rules before the campaign or session starts.

^ This.

What you're essentially dealing with is a Power Gamer. Someone who wants their character to do all these great things, and shine above all the rest.

In this instance, co-DMing is a bad idea. Because there's a direct conflict of interest between the shared character. The other DM wants the character to do X, Y and Z when he's the player and you're the DM.

I disagree with "talking to him" (having dealt with a Power Gamer before) - this is simply their style of play, and they don't see it as wrong. Some people enjoy mini-maxing their characters to be the best at everything. Which is fine, if you're in a group who share that same mentality. However, if you're dealing with a character that's overshadowing others, there's a very good chance that that person is ruining the game for others (who may or may not voice their complaints).

I personally think one of you needs to step down as a Co-DM, and just do a single DM. Lay out the house rules BEFORE the game begins; not during the game.

[Tanarii]

Im going to go with a different answer here.....you are BOTH in the wrong. Neither of you should be interrupting the others DM session with your complaints. If you or he dont like what the other is doing then TOO BAD....those complaints can wait until AFTER the session is over.


IMHO, you can't complain about his actions and then do the same thing yourself.


This. I skimmed a bit and didn't notice you doing it, but if you're alternating DM duties then when you're not the DM you need to stop backseat DMing. Neither of you have proven able to do that.
I have to agree with these three. The problem player is both you and the other player, for when the other guy DMs. I've been a DM for a long time, over thirty years now. One of the two hardest things for me as a player is to hang up my DM hat. The other is to hang up my rules lawyer hat. I have to force myself to do that when I'm playing and not try to point out something I see as a failure on the part of the other DM, which in my case usually means a failure to adhere to the rules. In your case it sounds like you go for 'that's not logical'. Which as a DM, let me tell you is just as irritating as someone constantly correcting you on the letter of the RAW.

However, on the magic items for his character thing ... well that just sounds weird. Were you not there when the loot was handed out or something? What loot generator has the party agreed to that does random assignments? What loot generator are you guys using for your campaign?

[fatbaby]

Wow thanks everyone for all of the opinions posted. I have too much to answer here, but I will try to respond. As far as letting go and not being a backseat DM, I understand your points completely. It is very hard to let go when you are a PC if you are used to DMing. The main reason I speak up is because some of the rules he wishes to enforce would be hugely detrimental to the party and the session.

As for co-DMing, I see now that it was a mistake, but I am trying not to cause a rift in our friendship by walking away. He is a great friend, but IMO a bad DM.

As for talking to the other members of the party, after every game that I DM, I have a "suggestions" portion. I ask everyone for comments, concerns, questions, suggestions, etc. However, as is usual with a group of friends, no one wants to bring up any negatives. Fear of starting an argument I guess. I can't get them to voice an opinion, so I am the guy who looks like a ****. :/

I like the ideas for a drawback for having a tail, but it is likely that will never fly.

Idk what loot generator he was using, some app on his phone. I don't use a generator, I like to plan out what is going to be at the end of the dungeon lol.

[Tanarii]

Idk what loot generator he was using, some app on his phone. I don't use a generator, I like to plan out what is going to be at the end of the dungeon lol.I guess I was assuming you're a single party going through multiple adventures. That's why I was wondering how he ended up with loot without the entire party being aware of when it was obtained, and usually some method of dividing up the loot being decided on.

[DireSickFish]

Instead of walking away from the game you could walk away from the DM chair. It's clear you have very different styles of DMing. And co-DMing needs to have a harmony between the two DMs or it just won't work. Let him know that the disagreements in style are causing a rift in the game and you're stepping down and letting him run the adventure from now on if he wants. You'll DM your own game in the future now that you have a better handle on your DMing style.

This also means you'll stop playing the DMPC for him and fade him out of the game completely. Or at least that's the argument you have to try and make.

[Yllin]

Instead of walking away from the game you could walk away from the DM chair. It's clear you have very different styles of DMing. And co-DMing needs to have a harmony between the two DMs or it just won't work. Let him know that the disagreements in style are causing a rift in the game and you're stepping down and letting him run the adventure from now on if he wants. You'll DM your own game in the future now that you have a better handle on your DMing style.

This also means you'll stop playing the DMPC for him and fade him out of the game completely. Or at least that's the argument you have to try and make.

This. You can even give the other DM the choice: if he wants to proceed as a full-time DM or as a full-time player. The DMPC will either become a regular PC or a regular NPC (and shouldn't go adventuring with the party no more)

[Dren Nas]

My first campaign ever, a fellow DM and I agreed to run a 4 part campaign from lvl 1-20. I took the first part, he took the second, I take the third, he takes the last. Each part is a different element: earth, fire, water, air. I feel it is a good way to get used to DM'ing. When he DM's, I play my character and his character, and vice versa. Problem is, he is used to older editions, and also likes to make up some of the rules to his liking. However I don't agree with his rulings. Example: His tiefling rogue has an opposable tail that can grip things, like the edge of a cliff if he misses his 1st Dex save, giving him a second chance. I think this is unfair to other PCs, but I can't make him see this. I notice other unfair advantages for his character, like a +3 rapier and wings of flying at level 5, but if I bring them up he says they were rolled randomly and assigned randomly via loot generator. No one else has any legendary weapons, etc and we're now level 9.

I can see his point about the tail, but I would rule that he gets a huge negative if not possible due to it being an extremely weak appendage. Or you just say no because he already has his racial bonuses already. Treading the line between catering to players and keeping them in line with everyone else is tough especially when they can justify it.


Now more importantly is that our disagreements on the rules, and differences in DM styles often leads to contention between us while playing. He interrupts me while I am DMing to tell me I am wrong, whether RAI, or rules as he chooses to interprets/invents them. Or while he DMs I have to stop him to express a huge flaw in logic, or economy of movement, or ability checks, etc. Example: We are walking the desert in some sort of demiplane of the Plane of Fire (but not the actual Plane of Fire). Its 120-130 degrees. However, no matter how often we rest, or how often we hydrate, we have to make two CON checks per day to avoid exhaustion. Except his character, because a tiefling his PC is immune to fire, and thus heat. This means almost every encounter is played with a severe disadvantage for most PCs.

I would still have his character roll but with bonuses due to his fire RESISTANCE . Fire resist is not the same thing as immunity. if he were actually immune, I could see his point.


Sometimes the disagreement is settled quickly, other times it becomes a full on argument. Other members of the party are starting to voice to me their issues with this. From what I am told they err on my side commonly because I back up my points with information from the PHB or common real world knowledge. I have also had a player quit coming because of this dissension.

I've had the same problems in a group I'm currently DMing for. I've had to sit down with the other DM and explain that I'm not trying to nurf him or his character because I only gave him 1/2 bonuses for something he thought he should have full bonuses against it. I had to explain why I did it. I've also had to explain that I want him to keep playing, but he can leave at any point he wants.(Guy literally tore his character sheet in 1/2 because he was throwing a fit. Big drama. I don't recommend doing that, but it's a last resort thing.) I don't think a player should be able to hold the group hostage if he doesn't get his way.


Sorry so long-winded. Just wanted to give a fair explanation before asking advice. I need help. Should I give in and let him dictate the game? Should I put my foot down? Should I walk away? Should I ask him to walk away? The worst part is he is a good friend and I don't want D&D to drive a stake between us. D&D is supposed to bring friends together! Thanks for any advice.

The problem with DMing with other DMs in the group is that they always want to do things the way they want to do things. One way to help is to allow the group to vote on allowing things to happen in a particular way. For example, I allowed my group to vote on whether to use the other DMs house rule rather than the PHB/DMG rule for critical hits in a 3.5 campaign I ran earlier this year. This allows you to let everyone get concerns out in the air, and if the players want to allow a player with fire resistance immunity from the heat you mentioned before, so be it. However, it should also work for characters with cold resist or whatever. I've started doing this from time to time. Sometimes it goes my way, sometimes it goes his way. Just make sure you explain that if it works for the players, it will work for NPCs (and enemies) also. This makes the group really consider if the advantages are worth the disadvantages or not.

Hope my advice helps! Good Luck, and have fun!

EDIT: I really think negatives and unintended consequences for having such a "powerful" tail are in order should he continue to try to abuse it.

[Contrast]

... Your reset could be an overwhelming force that captures and disarms them. They find themselves unconscious and butt naked on the road. It could be a campaign where the BBEG has been breeding new strains of Rust Monsters. ...

If the other DM comes on here with a story in a few months of his mean co-DM who railroaded the party with undefeatable foes and stole all their equipment, its on you :smalltongue:

There can be reasons for a DM to reconsider stuff they've given the party but this should typically be handled OOC in my opinion to get everyone to understand whats going on before the IC explanation. You sound like you've tried the OOC and it hasn't gone so well.


... Or while he DMs I have to stop him to express a huge flaw in logic, or economy of movement, or ability checks, etc. ...

This is something you have to be careful with. Sometimes things don't make sense because the DM goofed, sometimes they don't make sense because of things your character doesn't know yet. Usually when something isn't making sense to me I will verbalise my thoughts in character - 'But he couldn't have been the murderer because we read the memories of that witness you saw him somewhere else' which gives the DM the opporunity to a) look smug and sit there in silence (ok, my character doesn't know something) b) realise I've misunderstood/misremembered something and let me know (you remember this guy has an identical twin brother, yeah?) or c) backtrack/come up with a justification (wait, ****, that was this guy? give me a minute guys).


All that said, it does sound like this is a bit of a thorny one as the solution is OOC and it sounds like you have tried speaking to him. My immediate suggestion would be to stop playing each others characters (I never really understand why people do that the whole co-DMing thing anyway personally, or the even more insane people who rotate DMs every few weeks in the same campaign - madness!). I know its potentially slightly immersion breaking but this is a game played with friends for fun and stuff that makes the game better is more important - have your characters be elsewhere doing something else when you're DMing. That instantly solves all your DMPC problems as the DM cannot simply hand his character a load of things or abilities without your say so.

This is more broadly something my group has always done - if someone can't make it that night then their character just isn't there for whatever reason. We don't discuss where their character is or what they're doing - they're just not there. We have access to any critical kit they were carrying but otherwise their character sheet is off limits. When they come back they will magically appear wherever it is most convenient for them to do so. It means no-one has ever come back to find their character dead or stranded and means we don't have to waste time trying to come up with convoluted explanations for things.

The above doesn't solve the current problem but offers a potential future solution. Unless you're super invested I would probably bail on the initial plan and offer instead to run your own campaign - if you go down this route I would suggest convincing him to either kill off his character in some suitably noble fashion or have him otherwise removed from the game somehow to try and avoid further DMPCing.

Something else I was going to suggest was maybe trying some different systems. I don't think theres anything wrong with 5e but this would offer the opportunity to create new, fresh characters without confrontation. It may be that another system or campaign style might allow the two of you to play together more harmoniously. Unfortunately I can't suggest what that might be - a more rules light system may help both of you to avoid getting bogged down in minutiae or it might let him run roughshod over the players, a more rules heavy system might reduce debate or encourage rules lawyering. This is a pretty extreme response though so I wouldn't consider it unless you had a hankering to play something else anyway.

[Falainothiras]

If your story is accurate, the other DM is acting in bad faith in this situation. The fact that he "rolled" on a loot generator a +3 weapon and a fly item on a 5 level character which happens to be his, and while you were absent, is a huge red flag.
As others have said, stop switching the roles and decide who will be the permanent DM. I myself would ditch the game, if your co-DM is actually cheating to get an advantage, the game is bound to get toxic.

[Thrudd]

Co-DMing a single campaign is a weird situation to start with. It would be best, if you both want to continue DM'ing, that you each run your own separate campaigns and just alternate which game is played each session, or on whatever schedule you want to come up with. I would ask him if he'd like to DM the rest of the campaign, or if he'd like you to, so that you can put an end to the arguments.

If the co-DMing must go on, you two need to sit down to talk and should come to an agreement that whomever is DM gets to run the game the way they want, and their word is law. No more interrupting the game to complain or argue or pointing out what you think is wrong. If you're the player and disagree with how something is ruled, suck it up and get on with the game. You can talk about what you didn't like after the game is over, if it is that important.

One caveat to that: as co-DMs, you also need to both agree on any house rules that are implemented, so that ruling can be consistent when the game changes hands. Neither of you should just add or change rules without consulting the other DM. From now on, if it isn't in the book, then it needs co-DM agreement before it is added to the game (like the tiefling's prehensile tail). If there are rules in the books that aren't clear or cause confusion, you need to talk about it together and agree on how those situations should be ruled in the future. Try to address all the things you two have been disagreeing about so far, and come to a decision between you about what the game's official ruling will be.
There will always be situations that come up which the two of you haven't worked out in advance, and that is when the current DM makes a ruling, and the players must accept it.

If you end up DMing, the best way to handle his character's unearned advantages is to give all the other characters equivalent advantages in the form of their own awesome magic items (preferably that they find or are given in-game, during adventures). Then you can present appropriate challenges for the whole group without worrying about singling out his character because of the power difference. I think this is the least disruptive and confrontational way to deal with the situation. Yes, he likely cheated in creating that character and gave it abilities and items he had no right to, but it's too late to prevent that, now. In the future, insist all characters for games you DM are created in everyone's presence and according to the rules you have decided on.

[Samayu]

Recommendation: No arguing. If you have a problem with a rule, you're allowed to bring it up, but then the DM makes a ruling and it's over... at least until afterward.

Choices:
1. The co-DM thing isn't working out. One of you should give it up. That's up to agreement between the two of you, or by player preference, if there's a strong one.

2. The co-DM thing isn't working out, with DMPC's. Only players get characters. It should be simple enough to bring in a new character of appropriate power when it's time to switch DM's.

3. The power gamer thing isn't working out. Explain the things he does that are evidence of a problem and ask him to try to work on it.

4. The power gamer thing isn't working out. Explain the things he does that are evidence of a problem and suggest it's time he moves on.

5. The power gamer thing isn't working out. Explain the things he does that are evidence of a problem and say that you and the rest of the players are moving on.

These are the simple choices, but ex-communicating a friend is tough.