DM Help: Loudmouth player may get himself killed.

[Virfortis]

Hey everyone, this is kind of a heavy starter thread, but this is less of a simple "dealing with a disruptive player" situation and more of asking if I'm in the right to do this.

I'm a new DM, I run a decent sized D&D community because I'm the only one local that will. I made a homebrew alternative to the adventurer's league wherein the players of all the tables operate in different facets of a guild.

Well, my table has a problem. Y'see, I'm the noob table, I take in all the first timers to get them hooked into the story and gameplay with intriguing character choices and in-depth roleplaying opportunities. Everyone that hits level 5 at my table usually earns a cool story reward. I made a watered down version of gourmand for someone that wanted to be a master chef.

Except...this one guy...(language warning ahead)

The only functional word in this guy's vernacular is [insert sexualized term for feline]. No, really. Everyone not him is it, anyone who uses tactics other than what is conveinent for his human variant mobile monk min-max is it, it's pretty much the only thing he talks, says, or insults with. Even when it's not his turn, he's shouting it. My wizard has already threatened real life physical violence if the player insults his mother and tries to hide behind "it's just my character dude."

Him dying/being kicked out is not up for discussion. I've had it with him and warned him last week he either gets his act together or he's out.

Now this week, the party is set to be introduced to a 14th level bard (they are level 3) inspired by Tarquin, Elan's father. He wants the party to shape up to be more than they are now and "offers" to be their evil villain. This was planned before this monk showed up.

This monk is going to mouth off. The rest of my party is smart enough not to.

This bard has disintegrate, possibly finger of death, and has an ego issue.

Am I wrong in zap frying the monk if he tries to tick off the bard? Bards hate bland, one dimensional characters after all.

They all have been told that there's a lot going on in the world, most of it is not at their level. This is one of those times.

I promise my next post will be a bit higher quality, but I'm desperately trying to prepare for the explosion that is sure to come.

[Koo Rehtorb]

Perhaps a warning shot first to see if he wises up. If he keeps doing it after that warning shot then it's his own fault.

[Virfortis]

Perhaps a warning shot first to see if he wises up. If he keeps doing it after that warning shot then it's his own fault.
Hrm, polymorph him into a cat?

[WhovianBeast]

Zap some NPC who mouths off to the bard first. Bonus points if it's a relative of the bard. If the player doesn't get the message after that, he kinda deserves it.

[Virfortis]

Zap some NPC who mouths off to the bard first. Bonus points if it's a relative of the bard. If the player doesn't get the message after that, he kinda deserves it.

I thought about that, but I'm worried he may just stay quiet until the gnomish death ball is gone, then crank his BS up to 11.

But just so we're clear, there's nothing wrong with having a high level NPC introduced for story reasons? Even when someone is going to be stupid around them?

[Koo Rehtorb]

Hrm, polymorph him into a cat?

It doesn't really matter what you do, honestly. So long as it's something that demonstrates that this guy is trigger happy and powerful.

There's nothing wrong in and of itself with having high level NPCs in the world and around. It can be a problem if they're misused. NPCs shouldn't be central to the story, especially when they're powerful NPCs.

[Keltest]

I thought about that, but I'm worried he may just stay quiet until the gnomish death ball is gone, then crank his BS up to 11.

But just so we're clear, there's nothing wrong with having a high level NPC introduced for story reasons? Even when someone is going to be stupid around them?

Nothing at all. Frankly, its almost expected that theres somebody out there who's been doing their thing longer than the PCs have. PCs poke people stronger than they are at their own risk.

Having said that, OOC problems need to be resolved OOC. Its one thing if your loudmouth player is only sassy in character, but if his in-game rudeness is just a byproduct of his out of game rudeness, you need to tackle the out of game rudeness, not the in-game rudeness.

[Joe the Rat]

That's kind of like asking if it's okay to meet a dragon (the answer is yes).

Now I am hoping that there were some hints about the Tarquin ersatz being in-world, otherwise it is going to look a bit like you dropping someone in specifically to screw with the potty monk. Whether or not this guy has paid attention is not the issue - just that somebody can legitimately say "I've heard of this guy." Your monk will still complain.

But there is another option: Throw the bum out. If someone is annoying and offensive, particularly to other players, then it is acceptable to boot them from your table. If your pseudo AL included something like the AL player's guide for all players - which includes discussion of conduct - you have documentation to the effect of "Don't be a douche, or we ask you to leave."
(Apologies to Douche. I don't mean you.)

[The Aboleth]

But just so we're clear, there's nothing wrong with having a high level NPC introduced for story reasons? Even when someone is going to be stupid around them?

I don't think it's a problem at all. It sounds like you've been explicit with the party about the nature of your world (lots of high-level characters with grand machinations that the party is not yet equipped to deal with), so if they happen to meet one of those characters they should know to tread carefully--and if one of them chooses not to do so, then the consequences are on them.

However, I would caution with killing the problem player's character outright. To me, killing a character in this manner is the nuclear option, and should really only be used as a last resort. It sounds like this player's character hasn't yet had any truly significant consequences as a result of their actions, so having the first major consequence be death seems a little much.

Like someone else mentioned above, maybe polymorph them into a cat for a bit. Or have the evil bard do something else that hampers the party in the short-term but ultimately won't cause a TPK--I'm not sure what that could be, off the top of my head, but basically what I'm suggesting is to have the villain be explicit in saying "This is your fault, so now you're going to suffer for awhile--and if the next time we meet you haven't changed your tone, then expect much worse."

Maybe doing this will force him to re-evaluate his actions and play his character in a more restrained manner for a bit. You need look no further than Belkar as a prime example--previously a one-dimensional character that was a detriment to the party, when faced with a literal life-or-death "shape up or ship out" scenario, he opted to alter his behavior in a way that benefited the party (even if he tried to justify it to himself as him just "faking" it). Perhaps this problem player's character can have a similar epiphany?

[Virfortis]

Basically we have a rule 0.5 that says "do what works for your table and makes it happy" that overrides all other rules. So long as a table is happy, I never intervene.

I could not stand the choking restrictiveness of AL, which killed all fun for me, so that's why I opted for this system. My personal rule is that AL is the minimum ruling, so I do use point buy and PHB+1 and there are community standards which will be enforced harshly if he doesn't take a hint. Still, I love the freedom because I finally don't have to say "that's not in the module"

Yes this means one of our tables is reenacting a somehow more mary sue version of Twilight, but everyone at the table is happy with it so screw it.

The person outside of the game isn't annoying, and has so far left the wizard alone. He just wants to play a salty sea dog turned monk...

That quit the monastery because everyone was too much of a [you guessed it...]

[kyoryu]

I thought about that, but I'm worried he may just stay quiet until the gnomish death ball is gone, then crank his BS up to 11.

But just so we're clear, there's nothing wrong with having a high level NPC introduced for story reasons? Even when someone is going to be stupid around them?

Why would there be?

Of course, don't rely on an IC fix (high level NPC doing things to the PC) to fix an OOC problem (guy being a loudmouthed ass).

But if you don't want him to kill Mr. Monkmouth, go the other route. Have the NPC absolutely delight in showing him how small and pathetic he is.

[The Aboleth]

Basically we have a rule 0.5 that says "do what works for your table and makes it happy" that overrides all other rules. So long as a table is happy, I never intervene.

Yes this means one of our tables is reenacting a somehow more mary sue version of Twilight, but everyone at the table is happy with it so screw it.

The person outside of the game isn't annoying, and has so far left the wizard alone. He just wants to play a salty sea dog turned monk...

That quit the monastery because everyone was too much of a [you guessed it...]

That's fine if that's the character he wants to play, but that character has to eventually realize that his actions have consequences. There are places and types of people that might tolerate and even enjoy such language being casually thrown around, but if his character chooses to join a group that is NOT ok with it, then he must either tone it down or leave the party to find one that is a better fit (the character, not the player, though both might ultimately be the case).

And really, his monk can still be a bad-mouthed "rebel" if he plays it right. Directing a string of colorful insults at the orcs you're attacking can be hilarious, but you need to both pick your spots and change up the insults to keep them fresh--constantly saying "You're a [alternate word for feline]!" over and over is boring, among other things, but saying "You stink worse than a pound of manure that's been festering inside the skull of a dracolich for a millenia!" and then adding a couple vulgarities at the end for good measure CAN be funny if played up in the right way.

[Joe the Rat]

Cat polymorph. For the irony. Don't be surprised if he makes his save, though.

He's supposed to be a salty sea-dog? That's disappointing.
It's one thing for a character to be rude and condescending, it's another to be rude and condescending in a colorful, creative, and entertaining way.

So you need to make Tarquinade a Shakespearean pirate. Show him how it's done.

[MintyNinja]

I agree with all the others advocating for running your table the way you have planned, but I'd like to offer a suggestion aside frm Polymorph or Disintegrate: Feeblemind. It renders the character mute but affects stats a min-maxed monk doesn't need. It also drops him down to the intelligence of a stupid puppy, but he doesn't seem to have any problems with that so far.

[Geddy2112]

Being a reckless character is one thing-an experienced player at my table once ran a rather insane/silly ranger that was Crocodile Dundee turned up to 11, who thought it was a good idea to tame a wild werewolf. He knew that either 1. he tamed the werewolf or 2. would die. Lo and behold, he died, but the player did it in a way so the rest of the party was safe, and he accepted the actions of a foolish and reckless character. His character was...bizzare, but he never acted against the party IC or OOC. If you want to run a moron character, or confrontational jerk character, then go ahead, but understand the consequences and be willing to accept them when karma comes knocking. And if you have to play out silly, jerk, or any other character concept that can start problems, please excuse yourself and limit it to getting your character killed and not bringing the party with you.

On this front, I say have Tarquin go full out on him. Clearly establish that this NPC is very powerful and give ample warning, but if he does his normal actions, off him. Don't do this as any kind of punishment, just as the "actions have consequences" thing. Think about it as if a character jumped off a cliff and fell several hundred feet-they should take damage from the fall, right? It is no different.

There seems to be an OOC problem though, that this person is just a toxic player. If you have warned him to stop doing XYZ at the table or else he is gonna get booted, then boot him.

[Winter_Wolf]

Honestly I thought the OP was going to wrap up with "and now several people want to kick the ass of/kill the player.

If the player's character dies, well so what? That's a thing that happens to characters sometimes, it's called "consequences". Like booting a player that can't reel it in a little when he's being an ass and told to tone it down or knock it off.

[N810]

Hrm, polymorph him into a cat?

Morph him into a female dog. ;)

[Segev]

This really sounds like an OOC issue. Just kick him from the game if he's displeasing everybody so much.

[Freed]

If he says that word too much have it offend the Bard and the bard will put a mark of justice on him triggered by that word. Make it absolutely clear beforehand that the bard is a high-class noble who dislikes vulgarity and afterwards (if he does it anyway) what will trigger the mark and what the mark does.

[John Longarrow]

I'd talk to the player. Advise him that this language isn't tolerated at your table. Advise him to change what he's saying or he's out of the game.

If he continues, boot him from the game.

This is not an IC issue. He is not RPing a character. He is being disruptive. Any IC activity will have no effect.

If he thinks this is something funny and he's actually trying to RP, telling him to stop or get booted will fix it. If he's just being a troll, he gets booted.

[Ruslan]

I've had it with him and warned him last week he either gets his act together or he's out.I don't see a problem here. Him mouthing off would count as an indication that he has, indeed, not gotten his act together. Ergo, he is out.

This bard has disintegrateWow, talk about going out with a bang!

[Max_Killjoy]

I'd talk to the player. Advise him that this language isn't tolerated at your table. Advise him to change what he's saying or he's out of the game.

If he continues, boot him from the game.

This is not an IC issue. He is not RPing a character. He is being disruptive. Any IC activity will have no effect.

If he thinks this is something funny and he's actually trying to RP, telling him to stop or get booted will fix it. If he's just being a troll, he gets booted.

Agreed.

Don't let this get lost in in-character nuance or subtlety.

The problem is the player, the solution lies with addressing it with the player.

[Forumlurker]

The person outside of the game isn't annoying, and has so far left the wizard alone. He just wants to play a salty sea dog turned monk...
A lot of people seem to have overlooked this.

To me, it seems more like a case of "this guy is playing a really annoying character." And that's it. I mean I wouldn't be the first to say talk to the player OOC if it's being consistently disruptive, but that would seem to be the best course of action.

[Cluedrew]

The person over all might be fine but the player is causing a problem. You are never "just playing my character" you are always effecting the game and if makes the game less fun... something needs to change.

That thing should probably happen out of character. Tell him to mix it up or tone it down as necessary. Maybe have him swear like Captain Haddock from TinTin (who doesn't actually swear, but has some very colourful sea-themed curses).

[Kelb_Panthera]

This is an OOC problem masquerading as a problem character. Don't be fooled.

Way I see it, you have two options.

You tell him very plainly and very flatly that you don't care "what his character would do/say." If he breaks the group's social taboos again, he can sit out the session and/or leave at his discretion. Then follow through. The moment that word passes his lips, you tell him "you're out" and continue the game as though his character isn't there and never has been. Don't back down if he whines or begs because he's been repeatedly warned. He can come back next week and exist in the game world again. This is the -generous- option.

The less generous option is to just call/text/e-mail him right now and tell him that his attendance on game-night is no longer necessary and that you'll see him around.

It's as simple as this; he either shapes up and flies straight or you boot him. Gaming demands -everyone- compromise sometimes and now it's his turn.

[BWR]

Having been on both sides of the "really annoying character" issue: this is an OOC problem. Tell him to make a new character that doesn't annoy the hell out of everyone.
If he can't stomach that, then he won't be a good member of the group.
Sure, it might sting a bit to be told people don't like what you are doing but any sensible person will understand that making the game unenjoyable for everyone else is worse.

[hymer]

[insert sexualized term for feline]

I'm going to be wondering about that one for a while. Which language is it? Maybe I've got no chance.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I'm going to be wondering about that one for a while. Which language is it? Maybe I've got no chance.

Answer PM'd to you.

[hymer]

Answer PM'd to you.

You have my thanks! :smallsmile: I was hoping to learn a new word there, but it was merely a blind spot that kept me from seeing the point.

[Yllin]

Having been on both sides of the "really annoying character" issue: this is an OOC problem. Tell him to make a new character that doesn't annoy the hell out of everyone.
If he can't stomach that, then he won't be a good member of the group.
Sure, it might sting a bit to be told people don't like what you are doing but any sensible person will understand that making the game unenjoyable for everyone else is worse.

This is some sound advice. Solve it OOC, but be constructive about it. Explain to the player that what he is doing is ruining fun for everyone else around the table, and ask him to change his character's demeanor or to roll a new character, but don't threaten to boot him outright. Explain that it's not some sort of punishment, but a way to make the game better. Surely there are lots of character concepts that would be enjoyable both for the player and the rest of the group. You might even suggest some changes that would make his character fun for all players (including him).

If the player clearly states that he doesn't care about the fun for the rest of the group - then you are free to (and probably should) boot him.

Edit: about the bard killing the character - that depends a lot on the scene. Would that powerful character really use his spell to give the PC a lesson in that given situation? And OOC that is likely to be interpreted not as the NPC attacking the PC, but as the GM attacking the PC he doesn't like. So you should be careful here.

[Stealth Marmot]

I'm a new DM, I run a decent sized D&D community because I'm the only one local that will. I made a homebrew alternative to the adventurer's league wherein the players of all the tables operate in different facets of a guild.

Interesting. Sounds like you got a real cool community setting there.


Well, my table has a problem. Y'see, I'm the noob table, I take in all the first timers to get them hooked into the story and gameplay with intriguing character choices and in-depth roleplaying opportunities. Everyone that hits level 5 at my table usually earns a cool story reward. I made a watered down version of gourmand for someone that wanted to be a master chef.

Now I want to know the stats for a PC worthy class that is an Iron Chef.


Except...this one guy...(language warning ahead)

The only functional word in this guy's vernacular is [insert sexualized term for feline].

Fast way to make me not like you is using unimaginative and crass language like that.


No, really. Everyone not him is it, anyone who uses tactics other than what is conveinent for his human variant mobile monk min-max is it, it's pretty much the only thing he talks, says, or insults with. Even when it's not his turn, he's shouting it. My wizard has already threatened real life physical violence if the player insults his mother and tries to hide behind "it's just my character dude."

I HATE this excuse. I really do. Anyone who uses it is completely full of it.

First off, having a trait can have multiple different interpretations. A character like say, Belkar, who is a psychotic chaotic evil bastard, can still be interpreted as useful to the group by choosing specific areas to display his psychotic tendencies. When he steps out of line and his character ends up becoming a liability, he faces problems and comeuppance that makes them reinterpret and evolve the character. Good players know enough to figure out excuses and reasons to be a benefit to the party over a liability. The character can be secretly or subversively working towards his own goals, or they can be faking sincerity or honestly fear the party's possible retribution.

If a character has potentially problematic traits, the player has 2 options. 1. Figure out how to reinterpret those traits so that they don't actually become problematic, at least not consistently problematic. Or 2. Remove the traits or the character.

A player CHOOSES to play a particular character. Unless the traits are randomly rolled or shoved onto the character, the player chose to be a loud mouthed obnoxious jackass. Choosing to do so while knowing that it could be a problem, or not considering how it COULD be a problem, is a sign of an inconsiderate player who should be called out on such actions.

Now, you do have the option of letting the player play such a character, but allowing the consequences to fall as they may. However, you should first pull the player aside and explain "Listen, if your character continues to show no restraint, their will be consequences in game. I won't tell you what they are or from who, but there are several people who would not put up with behavior like that, especially from someone without too much to back it up. I should remind you, at your level, there are a LOT of bigger fish."


Him dying/being kicked out is not up for discussion. I've had it with him and warned him last week he either gets his act together or he's out.

Now this week, the party is set to be introduced to a 14th level bard (they are level 3) inspired by Tarquin, Elan's father. He wants the party to shape up to be more than they are now and "offers" to be their evil villain. This was planned before this monk showed up.

This monk is going to mouth off. The rest of my party is smart enough not to.

This is sort of a funny situation, a villain is actually offering to BE a villain like they are breaking the fourth wall.


This bard has disintegrate,

How?


possibly finger of death,

HOW??


and has an ego issue.

Well now that is just a bard class feature.


Am I wrong in zap frying the monk if he tries to tick off the bard? Bards hate bland, one dimensional characters after all.

More importantly, bards hate people that interrupt them or hurt the story, or even better they hate critics which I'm willing to bet this character will be.


They all have been told that there's a lot going on in the world, most of it is not at their level. This is one of those times.

I promise my next post will be a bit higher quality, but I'm desperately trying to prepare for the explosion that is sure to come.

If you get to the situation where the player has poked the bear enough that you could not possibly justify a lack of retribution, might I suggest that the bard decide that the character needs to go through some "character growth". Have the bard villain decide that the PC needs to have a little arc that teaches them humilty and they become better for it.

Then have the bard hit him with Baleful Polymorph (from a scroll perhaps) as suggested before. Turn him into a cat. That requires the other players to step up and figure out how to get him out of it. In fact, have the villain give them the location of a Break Enchantment scroll for their next quest if needed. Or just let the players figure it out.

Make it so the player cant communicate except through hisses and meows and actions, so they can't boss the players around, and since he is a cat he can't call the other players that word without the irony kicking in. In fact the player cant EVER use the term again without the irony kicking in and the other PCs looking at him knowingly. What's more, you can inform him that his LAWFUL alignment would make him most likely feel indebted to the players and want to show them more respect.

[Mr Beer]

You run a cool game, everyone is happy with it, you're the DM...this is a great position to be in, since you have all the authority you need to zap his character.

However, this is an OOC problem, I'd just talk to the guy and tell him to stop the behaviour you find annoying. Don't argue about it, don't accept the 'it's my character' line, just lay down the law. If he's still arguing after you explain the situation and tell him it's not up for debate, you politely invite him to game elsewhere. That's it. If you do this in a firm but unemotional manner, it gives him room to back down at any point but ultimately if he's not amenable to reason, it's better to get it done with now rather than have annoying sessions ahead.

[Algeh]

If you want to keep the player in the group, I recommend talking to him OOC. Tell him that his current word use and disruptive behavior is just not going to fly in this campaign. If that's exactly and only what his character would do, then his character will just need to go find someplace else off-camera to do it. Make it clear that this is the end of the objectionable word (and other objectionable behaviors) in your game, and that the question now is just about which way that end will be accomplished.

Offer him the following choices:

* Have his "salty" character written out and have him start playing a new character with a different, less "salty" personality that he thinks he will be less likely to create this issue - having his old character zapped by the NPC to show how evil he is could be a great way to write the character out if the player bought in, or you could even let him suggest something else along those lines as long as it doesn't chew up too much group time with his individual character death scene. Having the character decide to go back to his seafaring ways and wander off would also get the character out of your hair if the player was happier with not having their character killed off to solve a table-problem rather than as part of a purely in-game situation.

* Sit down outside of game time and brainstorm a list of catchphrases, habits, etc that can help convey "salty sea dog" in a way that's more in tune with your group and less "just acting like a total jerkface". This can be a written list he can keep with his character sheet and refer to as he tries to play the character. If he's actually stumped on how to play his character concept any differently and is open to this kind of help, it could turn things around for the character and help the player get better at roleplaying. Since he's a first timer, he may legitimately be struggling with how to play his character and falling back on the only personality "touchstone" he has for it (which appears to be acting like a total jerkface). Give him some better hooks to fall back on, and make it clear that the old way will not be happening any more. Then, bounce him from the group if he does not make a genuine effort to use his new material in place of the old.

* If he doesn't like those choices, he can choose to leave the group. Give him the same options of having his character be written out by wandering off or by story-advancing death, but possibly not gamed out in the player's presence. (I'm not a fan of killing off characters to "punish" players. It feels petty to me.)

I know the temptation for a DM confronted by a badly-behaving character is for the game world to punish all misbehavior as some sort of "natural consequences", but that kind of thing tends to warp your game as you spend all of the time building in ways for the world itself and everyone in it to punish rude or obnoxious behavior in ever-escalating and frequently implausible ways. In the real world, bad social behavior is often punished by a gradual loss of friends, opportunities, and/or respect, and those consequences are a little subtle to game out over the kinds of timelines and plotlines that most games run on, particularly if the behavior in question is making it harder for the rest of the players to enjoy the game in the meantime. If he was just, say, a condescending jerk to low-status NPCs but played well with the actual PCs (and wasn't a jerk to you, just NPCs that his character felt were "beneath" him), I could see that being a good time for in-game consequences of the NPCs treating him exactly as poorly as they think they can get away with. Acting like a jerk to other player's characters, particularly when interrupting on someone else's turn to do so, is too big of thing to handle that way and needs a "meta" solution that the player is in on.

[GungHo]

Is the player someone's little brother?

[Scorponok]

Maybe I'm getting less tolerant in my old age, but I'd have thrown this guy out on his @$$ a long time ago. Seems you have a good thing with running a D&D group with a lot of people. Why would you play with someone whom no one seems to like?

[Stealth Marmot]

Maybe I'm getting less tolerant in my old age, but I'd have thrown this guy out on his @$$ a long time ago. Seems you have a good thing with running a D&D group with a lot of people. Why would you play with someone whom no one seems to like?

Maybe it's his house.

Maybe they used to like him and just hang out with him now out of loyalty or habit.

Maybe it's so they can keep an eye on him so he doesn't cause some sort of property damage.

Maybe they are heroically letting him be part of their band so he doesn't cause horror and pain for other groups. You know, like the group that let's Russel Crowe be their main singer.

[MrNobody]

In these situation, the first thing is ALWAYS talking about it OoC. If it doesn't work, advise the player that his behaviour will have in game consequences. If it doesn't work and you still want to keep the player... make consequences happen.

In these case don't kill him, don't polymorph him... CURSE him.
An high level bard ( in 3.5 at 16th level... since is already out of reach for your players a couple of levels won't do a great difference) can use bestow greater curse. Use it to curse the character so that every time he swears, or is less then very very very kind to someone, he becomes nauseated and starts vomoting all around for... one minute???? It may make.him upset, but you warned him....

Also, it could be a nice starting point for player growth, character growth... and even for a, side quest to remove the curse!

[goatmeal]

Hrm, polymorph him into a cat?

Do this. It'll be hilarious.

[John Longarrow]

Thinking about this for a little while, there is a funny solution in game that could really get everyone laughing.

Have them enter an area where his favorite insult is considered a "Title" and is only used in reference to the current champion in the arena; a were-tiger.

Watch his face when everyone acts strange regarding his favorite phrase. Let me say something like "I can beat you you <<Insert term here>>" where upon his challenge is accepted and he's escorted to the arena to face the winning champion <<insert term here>> for an unarmed, non-lethal fight.

Let him get beat by THE <<insert term here>> in front of a crowd. As he lies there in pain, the champion prances around the arena to crowds chanting their title....