Kicking players and the scope of DM's powers.

[Dudu]

Well, here I am, in one of the most interesting campaigns I ever played in this forum.

Lots of interesting characters, both PC and NPCs. An interesting lore. A dedicated DM who posts daily and a healthy cast of good players.
It's not all dreamy, though. The campaign, albeit interesting is quite brutal. Players die, a bit too often. There are means of ressurecting them, so it's not like we have to make a new sheet. This fact about the campaign was openly stated by DM at recruiting, so most who play there cope with it. Those who don't, leave.

This is not the problem, though.

Recently, I found the DM was being somewhat... tyrannical. One of our players just got kicked from the game. However, I never saw that players doing anything to harm the campaign. He was a good player, even though the character he was playing was somewhat weak compared to other party members. And he was overall a nice and fun guy.
But we had some discussions in OOC. The DM found that this player's tone was too agressive. Funny, I think the DM's tone was way more agressive during most of the campaign and yet no one of us though this was a good enough reason to report him. Of course, this might be a biased opinion, perhaps an outsider would have a more neutral view.

Looking at the OOC now, it really seems more of a matter of disagreeing with some of the DM's policy and stating it in OOC. Sounds like a proper use of the OOC to me. And the IC game was rolling smoothly. Well, players were getting bashed, but such situations are usual and not a problem I particularly have.

My real issue is if it's really ok to kick a player without any solid argument for doing so. Not a player who ever flammed, or slowed the campaign. Not a single infraction as per forum rules. A player who invested a lot of his time into the campaign too. Now he is not allowed to play by the DM. And theoretically, the players aren't allowed to complain, or else they might be kicked from a campaign they invested months into.
Isn't that abusive?

[Jay R]

My real issue is if it's really ok to kick a player ...

Yes, absolutely. And it's ok to drop a DM's game at any time, too. D&D, like any other social gathering, is a co-operative venture, and neither you nor I nor the DM have to play with anybody against our will.


... without any solid argument for doing so.

He has a solid reason. You just don't agree with it. That is not the same thing.


Not a player who ever flammed, or slowed the campaign. Not a single infraction as per forum rules. A player who invested a lot of his time into the campaign too. Now he is not allowed to play by the DM. And theoretically, the players aren't allowed to complain, or else they might be kicked from a campaign they invested months into.
Isn't that abusive?

Of course the players can complain. If I were in this situation, and thought it was wrong, I'd talk to the other players and see who else was willing to complain with me. Then I'd bring it up, with or without allies.

If the DM couldn't convince me, and I couldn't convince him, he wouldn't have to kick me out. I'd quit. D&D is a co-operative venture, and nobody has to play with a DM against his will.

[Dudu]

He has a solid reason. You just don't agree with it. That is not the same thing.
He has a reason, yes. I solid one? I don't think so.

Also, it's disrespectful to the player, disconsidering all the time he invested because he/she disagreed with him in a harmless subject.


Of course the players can complain. If I were in this situation, and thought it was wrong, I'd talk to the other players and see who else was willing to complain with me. Then I'd bring it up, with or without allies.

If the DM couldn't convince me, and I couldn't convince him, he wouldn't have to kick me out. I'd quit. D&D is a co-operative venture, and nobody has to play with a DM against his will.
That actually makes a lot of sense.

[kyoryu]

Honestly, for me it would depend on how it was discussed.

Disagree, fine, but in most games the GM gets the final call and at some point you have to go "okay, fine".

So I can see things under that description that would fairly result in getting kicked out, and things that wouldn't.

But ultimately, you're not going to change the GM's behavior. Either it's acceptable enough for you to keep playing, or it's not and you should leave. You can try talking to the GM about it, but I'd recommend doing so in private.

[lunaticfringe]

I find PbP, forums, texting, Facebook, and social media are strange sometimes. There is no tone or inflection or in person body language to read. Simple Jokes or Disagreements can get blown way out of proportion. I once made a joke through text that turned into basically a two day argument with an ex, it didn't matter that I was joking, the damage was done.

But yeah the DM can kick players as they see fit. It's not fun DMing for someone you don't like and it's ok to not like people.

[Dudu]

Honestly, for me it would depend on how it was discussed.

Disagree, fine, but in most games the GM gets the final call and at some point you have to go "okay, fine".

So I can see things under that description that would fairly result in getting kicked out, and things that wouldn't.

But ultimately, you're not going to change the GM's behavior. Either it's acceptable enough for you to keep playing, or it's not and you should leave. You can try talking to the GM about it, but I'd recommend doing so in private.

Well, it's PbP in this very forum, so I think there's nothing wrong in liking the last page of OOC (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?504702-The-Eternal-Winter-OOC-3/page13) for those curious enough.

But it's been a long story not comprised in this last page in OOC. His mood swings wildly.

And I agree with you. We won't change his behavior. Not this guy behavior, for sure.

The overall advice seems to be: leave the game. It hurts a bit, because I was loving the game, but the way the DM treats, particularly two former players, sounds just wrong. And it seems equally wrong that I keep playing it for long even after he treated those two so poorly.


I find PbP, forums, texting, Facebook, and social media are strange sometimes. There is no tone or inflection or in person body language to read. Simple Jokes or Disagreements can get blown way out of proportion. I once made a joke through text that turned into basically a two day argument with an ex, it didn't matter that I was joking, the damage was done.

But yeah the DM can kick players as they see fit. It's not fun DMing for someone you don't like and it's ok to not like people.
I was under that impression. Void of the correct inflection, a joke can look offensive.

Although there are time I find it hard to interpret something, that at first sight, looks like an insult, as a joke.

[Fri]

Only leave if you feel want to leave, but not because you think "it's the right thing to do" (though you might feel want to leave because you think it's the right thing to do I guess)

Basically, it's fine to dislike people even with non-logical reasoning, as long as you don't act like a jerk. And you don't have to interact with EVERYONE, this is true in real life or online life. A GM has all the right to kick people out of a group, but players also have all the right to leave a group. Of course, usually it won't come to that, because you would play games with your friends and you'd talk about it over a drink or something, but not everyone has that kind of privilege. (Though, an addition is, you also don't always have to game with your friends. It's completely normal to have good relationship with someone and be bud bud with him, but not liking his gaming style and not wanting to be in a game gmed by him even if you share the same hobby.)

[John Longarrow]

For myself, I read a few pages and noticed the DM does not take player feed back into account. To me, that is the sign of a very poor DM. I'd not play in that game.

[Knaight]

It depends. A GM can choose not to GM for a particular person, but whether they can unilaterally kick people out of a group is a different matter. In the context of a play by post between strangers the answer is usually going to be yes. In other contexts it could easily be no.

[BWR]

GMs can unilaterally kick people out of their game. Kicking people out of the group requires all the other players to agree.

In pbps, there tends to be little practical difference between a group and a game.

[Delicious Taffy]

I've kicked two players in the past. One was from just the one game, since there was a lot of complaining on his end, and he recently played a one-shot Halloween session I'd come up with. The other, well... He's been kicked from the group due to severe interpersonal conflicts, and there is no chance whatsoever that I'll be inviting him back or even tolerating him at my table.

This particular DM of yours seems like a bit of a Massengil-quality person when it comes to disagreements. The repeated statements of "Leave. Immediately." are pretty darn immature, and definitely a sign that this is a person to be avoided in the future. Having to always be right is a quality that no DM should have, and you're right to have left, even if it was fun while it lasted.

[Dudu]

Thanks for the replies, they helped.

Indeed, just presenting this issue leaving the details of the situation might make it hard for others to evaluate.
Each case has it's own.
For one, in my experience, it's usually the players who are problematic and it leaves to the DM to cope with a bunch trouble causing players. This might be the first time I find players doing their best to the welfare of everyone with the DM being the one harming the campaign.

Regarding the main issue of this topic. I think it's similar to inviting someone to your house, them.

You meet someone, find that someone fun and interesting. Invite to your house, to eat something or see a movie or just talk. But in the middle of the talk that person offends you for whatever frivolous reason and kicks you out of his/her house. Surely, it's in his/her right. But is still a bit dickish.
I think a more correct aproach would to take other players opinion on the matter. A game that involves the participation of many can't have this kind of decision taken so unilatteraly.

[Cozzer]

I'd say the GM has no duty to provide a "solid" reason for kicking somebody from the group, and the players have no duty to provide a "solid" reason to walk away. You can easily see how these two powers balance each other out. :smalltongue:

I mean, what he did is completely in the "scope of his powers", to use the name of the topic. But he needs to know there will be consequences. Each of the players will be wondering whether they're going to get kicked for arbitrary reasons in the future, and that doesn't make the game more fun. And if a game isn't fun, leaving it without asking the GM for permission is completely within the scope of the player's power.

So, it's all about balance, I think.

[Jay R]

Play if it's fun. Don't play if it's not fun.

And don't waste time judging if the DM has the right to do what he does, or "should" do what he does. It doesn't matter.

If he does something he has a right to do, and should do, and the game is no fun, then don't play.
If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is no fun, then don't play.
If he does something he has a right to do, and should do, and the game is fun, then play.
If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is fun, then play.

So it doesn't matter if he "should" do it. What matters is this:

Play if it's fun. Don't play if it's not fun.

It's that simple.

[SanguisAevum]

Thanks for the replies, they helped.

Indeed, just presenting this issue leaving the details of the situation might make it hard for others to evaluate.
Each case has it's own.
For one, in my experience, it's usually the players who are problematic and it leaves to the DM to cope with a bunch trouble causing players. This might be the first time I find players doing their best to the welfare of everyone with the DM being the one harming the campaign.

Regarding the main issue of this topic. I think it's similar to inviting someone to your house, them.

You meet someone, find that someone fun and interesting. Invite to your house, to eat something or see a movie or just talk. But in the middle of the talk that person offends you for whatever frivolous reason and kicks you out of his/her house. Surely, it's in his/her right. But is still a bit dickish.
I think a more correct aproach would to take other players opinion on the matter. A game that involves the participation of many can't have this kind of decision taken so unilatteraly.

I only needed to read two pages of that OOC thread to see that the DM was running the game for his own self, and not for the players.

A DM who does not take player feedback into account, is simply building his own little personal story, and using others to fill in the gaps in narrative.

As a DM of 25 years, I build games around the feedback and desires of the player. A DMs entire job is to make the game enjoyable for his group.


You made the right choice.

[Deophaun]

The truly outrageous part of that whole thing? Enforced multiclass penalties. The monster!

Anyway, this is an object lesson in the scope of the DM's powers: they have it all, until they have none.

[Dudu]

If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is fun, then play.

So it doesn't matter if he "should" do it. What matters is this:

Play if it's fun. Don't play if it's not fun.

It's that simple.
Disagreed.

If the DM is disrespectful to others, I think that's a valid point to not interact with this person.
Otherwise you're just condoning with abuse in order to have your fictional adventure running smoothly.

So rather:
If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is fun, talk with the DM about it.
If he somehow "outlaws" discussions and says that he'll kick you if you bring that topic again. Yes, leave the game. That's not an acceptable policy in a forum to begin with. Not when said discussion is completely in terms with what content the OOC threads allow.

I did talk with him. We did. He wasn't reasonable.
Anyway, long story short, there was a mass quit after I left and it seems the campaign might have ended. Or worse, he will just recruit unaware new players and be rude and abusive with them too.

I also though, back then, that all you should consider is if the game is fun or not. But now I feel it's not that simple. The momment your activity involves participation of multiple people, how those people treat each other is a matter that should be taken seriously.

[Knaight]

GMs can unilaterally kick people out of their game. Kicking people out of the group requires all the other players to agree.

In pbps, there tends to be little practical difference between a group and a game.

Pretty much. Face to face it depends on how the group was formed - did the GM recruit a bunch of players? Are they also the host? It varies.

[WindStruck]

Just want to throw in my two cents.

I am the player in question and disagreed with the DM on the map position of my character. I'm traveling and unable to modify or even view the map. I told them this. But I thought I gave clear enough directions in the description of my actions. Apparently not.

So I am arguing my case. I capslock TWO WORDS to emphasise them. And I am kicked for being "aggressive"...

Anyway, I agree with everyone. DM has the right to kick any player or stop DMing at any time. The players have the right to quit at any time too. So there's really only two options: quit or suck it up.

[kyoryu]

Play if it's fun. Don't play if it's not fun.

And don't waste time judging if the DM has the right to do what he does, or "should" do what he does. It doesn't matter.

If he does something he has a right to do, and should do, and the game is no fun, then don't play.
If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is no fun, then don't play.
If he does something he has a right to do, and should do, and the game is fun, then play.
If he does something he has no right to do, and shouldn't do, and the game is fun, then play.

So it doesn't matter if he "should" do it. What matters is this:

Play if it's fun. Don't play if it's not fun.

It's that simple.

This.


The truly outrageous part of that whole thing? Enforced multiclass penalties. The monster!

Anyway, this is an object lesson in the scope of the DM's powers: they have it all, until they have none.

And this.

A good GM understands these, and the relationship between them.


Just want to throw in my two cents.

I am the player in question and disagreed with the DM on the map position of my character. I'm traveling and unable to modify or even view the map. I told them this. But I thought I gave clear enough directions in the description of my actions. Apparently not.

So I am arguing my case. I capslock TWO WORDS to emphasise them. And I am kicked for being "aggressive"...

Anyway, I agree with everyone. DM has the right to kick any player or stop DMing at any time. The players have the right to quit at any time too. So there's really only two options: quit or suck it up.

Having read the thread, I really didn't understand his response to you.

Some of the stuff was a bit ranty, and as a GM, I probably would have asked it to be taken to PMs. But I really didn't see any issue with what you were posting, nor a lot of value in the response.

[Pex]

With bias, since it is a highly lethal game I'm not surprised the DM kicked a player out for disagreeing with him. Not a universal thing, but more often than not I have found high lethal games = tyrannical DMing. It is not the DM's job to kill off PCs. These DMs enjoy the power trip. I've long since lost patience with such DMs and refuse to play with them.

[BarbieTheRPG]

Players can walk when they like and GMs can walk or bounce players when they like.

The GM in your situation may have interpreted the 'aggressive' player as being abusive. I know I've run into that as a GM many times in the past. Players rarely realize how abusive their comments can be.

The hobby isn't about 'just players' or 'just GMs'. It's about the group and when anyone gets uncomfortable with what's going on, someone may have to go.

[Cozzer]

@Dudu:

Honestly, I wouldn't use the words "abuse" or talk about "obligations" when talking about a game where anyone can opt out at any time. Especially a forum game, where there isn't even the peer pressure of "being the one who disrupted the campaign" in the future.

I agree with the others that in the end it's all about fun. The GM acting like that, is basically implying that he doesn't care very much about the fun of his player. So the players will start acting basing on this fact, and the problem will solve itself. As it seems already happened, from what you said. :smalltongue:

[Jay R]

Disagreed.

If the DM is disrespectful to others, I think that's a valid point to not interact with this person.

Seeing abuse happen is not fun, so this doesn't disagree with my point.


Otherwise you're just condoning with abuse in order to have your fictional adventure running smoothly.

The only difference between our positions is that I don't set myself up as a final arbiter of what is or is not "abuse". I don't know what's going on in the DM's life. I don't know what happened privately between the DM and player.

We're doing the same thing for the same reasons. I'm just trying to be non-judgmental. I don't think I have the wisdom, the moral authority, or enough information to judge another person's actions. And I don't need to do so to solve my problem.

[Dudu]

Seeing abuse happen is not fun, so this doesn't disagree with my point.
Point taken.


@Dudu:

Honestly, I wouldn't use the words "abuse" or talk about "obligations" when talking about a game where anyone can opt out at any time. Especially a forum game, where there isn't even the peer pressure of "being the one who disrupted the campaign" in the future.

I agree with the others that in the end it's all about fun. The GM acting like that, is basically implying that he doesn't care very much about the fun of his player. So the players will start acting basing on this fact, and the problem will solve itself. As it seems already happened, from what you said. :smalltongue:
Indeed, after the mass quit we are now discussing a new campaign.

Life moves on, I guess. But it's a feeling similar to ending a book you were enjoying. Except you didn't finish the book, it ended early, and with a lot of dissent.

[Freed]

You could reuse your characters and one of you could take over as DM.

[WindStruck]

Well I can tell you nothing private happened between me and the DM dudu does not know about. In fact, from glimpses of private conversations he had with the DM, this guy seemed to have a low opinion of every player and their characters, and his goal was to make some players quit.

...

Everything about that is horribly wrong and not the way d&d should be nor can be played.

[Cozzer]

Sounds like he got a critical success on that goal. :smallamused:

And yeah, I understand the disappointment. Even when the campaign isn't the best, you get attached to the characters and their place in the world. No story should end like that.

[RazorChain]

This is why I don't play remotely....I can't clobber people who behave like idiots! Me? I'm an idiot...but also the GM but nobody has clobbered me yet and the players just behave like Oliver Twist and ask for more.

[Deophaun]

This is why I don't play remotely....I can't clobber people who behave like idiots! Me? I'm an idiot...but also the GM but nobody has clobbered me yet and the players just behave like Oliver Twist and ask for more.

That... sounds like a different kind of roleplay... with a different kind of dungeon master....

[RazorChain]

That... sounds like a different kind of roleplay... with a different kind of dungeon master....

Well sticks and stones
Can break my bones
But whips and chains excite me!

Where are all those dungeon mistresses? Am I in the wrong hobby?

[Jay R]

Well sticks and stones
Can break my bones
But whips and chains excite me!

Where are all those dungeon mistresses? Am I in the wrong hobby?

Well ... it is fantasy role-playing.

[Stealth Marmot]

Well ... it is fantasy role-playing.

With leather outfits and weapons.

[Dudu]

Second page of the thread and we are already delving into some weird territory.:smallbiggrin:

[John Longarrow]

Nope... If we were we'd be breaking out a PbP game of BBSW (https://rpggeek.com/rpgitem/184289/bbsw-big-breasts-small-waist-hentai-roleplaying-ga)...