Help: How to get rid an unwanted player in a diplomatic way

[FdL]

Well, we're 5 in our group. We have all more or less the same outlook with the game (we play D&D 3.5). All except for him.

He comes from playing AD&D, and is probably used to a different style of game. But it's beyond that. He has attitudes towards the game that make the rest uncomfortable. He plays all his characters the same (like a frenzied barbarian). He gets overexcited in the combats but disappears in the roleplaying parts, usually doesn't even speak and browses the manuals.

He is a problem player, and the rest of the group all agree in this. We're not having fun with him on our table and he doesn't seem to be having fun either, because we clash all the time with the different playing styles. Plus we have a potential replacement for him.

So we're seriously thinking of getting rid of him. Of course, it feels awful to kick someone from our group, but it has reached the point where it has to be done. It's no use to just tolerate him instead of telling him how we feel.

So we're thinking about how we're going to tell him without hurting his feelings. Oh, also he's quite volatile, so he is probably not going to take it well even if we talk with him maturely.

Well, we don't know how to do it in the less traumatic way for all. I'd be thankful if any of you has some input on the subject.

[Trauco]

Send him a letter, he might need to spend some skill points to read it (drum rolls... lousy joke).

Seriously, a letter, written on pc, signed by all, that clearly states how you feel as a group towards him. If he goes on a tantrum you are all faaar away from him, and he does not know who wrote the letter (type out the spaces to sign on the letter, so theres no apparent order besides alphabetical).

That's how I fire people from proyects :-)

[Pyro]

^@ I have no experience in this field mind you, but I don't think a letter is the best way to go about it. Somehow it it feels like "I was going to tell you in person but I'm too lazy and afraid you might freak out." Personally if the guy doesn't seem like he's having fun then it might not be much of a problem. I would go the way of just breaking it to him and hoping for the best.

Although you could convince the DM to pretend to be terminally ill so he can't hold sessions anymore, then you and the rest of the players meet somewhere else. OR you could be really annoying to him so he leaves.:smalltongue:

[Cyrano]

Start zapping him with lightning bolts and having everyone pretend this is good DMing. At worst, he'll constantly die until he gets bored. And best, he slaps you and leaves right away.
Try to get it on YouTube. I wanna see that.

[AslanCross]

I think he asked for a diplomatic way. o_o;;

I think you should just tell him that no one is happy about it any more, and that if he continues ignoring the RPing parts everyone else would do well to ignore him completely.

[North]

You could have the group split up. And have his part of the split involve Rping the situation out diplomatically cause hes surrounded by a horde of goblins etc. Sure he can try to fit them. Then he dies. Just put him into situations were combat isnt the answer and he has to respond, hes by himself/the target/ a lovesick ogre princess is in love with him because of his combat prowess etc.

[Sisqui]

I would get the most diplomatic person in the group or the one he is most comfortable with (if they are willing) to tell him. And tell him privately. They may want to tell him by phone if they are afraid he might get abusive face to face. But I definitely would NOT tell him in the midst of the group. That would just humiliate him, which I think you are trying to avoid. But I would also make it a clear cut thing, not subject to appeal. Make it a clean break. If you feel the need for someone with some semblance of authority to do it, then it should be the DM.

[Tom_Violence]

Call the police on him mid-session.

[shaka gl]

I play in that table (and often DM). Roleplaying situations wont work, cause thats not his problem. Its not that he does stupid/senseless things; its just that he WANTS to do them, but when the party convinces him not to; he just sits like... angry... the rest of the day and acts like if we had ofended him or something. The problem its not WHAT he does in the table, but the MOOD we have tu put up with.

PS: Also, he only plays stereotypes. And thinks he lives in a Die Hard movie.

[FdL]

Last session, IIRC: He had few HPs, a greenspawn razorfiend was hiding underwater, badly hurt too, but still butchering the party at his own pace. His contribution? "I jump into the water and try to hit him". He plays a rogue, but you wouldn't tell. Oh, also one with, what, 22 INT?

Remember MinMax from the Goblins webcomic? Well, it has something of his attitude. He made a tiefling character but then he gets upset because he's a level behind the other players. He tends to be childish and sulk when things don't go his way.

[FoE]

Shoot him an e-mail and tell him you've found a replacement. He's not a girlfriend that you've been dating for six months, for Pete's sake; he's a guy you game with. You can get away with "breaking up" through a Dear John letter in this instance. Just don't get too much into specifics; tell him he weirds everybody else out and disrupts play.

It would help if you switch your gaming nights to another night, preferably one where you know he will be busy.

Honestly, no matter how you approach it, the guy will probably flip out if his temperament is really volatile.

Alternatively, you could poison him. It's worked wonders for me. :smallwink:

[Vuzzmop]

Just tell him that he is making things less fun for everyone else, and then tell him (as a group) that he should probably find a group that favours kick in the door style gaming the way he does. I agree that a volitile person may take this badly, but what's he going to do, start a fist fight with you all over it?

[StickMan]

Well assuming this guy is not a close friend then just tell him this is not working out for you guys the Email idea might be ok but I would go with a phone call. If you do it in person and he is likely to get violent well there are 4 of you and one of him and you have to have hockey sticks next to you because you were playing hockey before he came over then I think the cops will believe you.

[shaka gl]

If you do it in person and he is likely to get violent well there are 4 of you and one of him and you have to have hockey sticks next to you because you were playing hockey before he came over then I think the cops will believe you.

I dont think that`ll work. See, we are from Argentina and hockey isnt exactly popular here. And a soccer-ball just sucks as a weapon.

[FdL]

I dont think that`ll work. See, we are from Argentina and hockey isnt exactly popular here. And a soccer-ball just sucks as a weapon.

Ummm...We probably shouldn't tell people that here hockey is played on grass and by girls :p

[Dispozition]

Ummm...We probably shouldn't tell people that here hockey is played on grass and by girls :p

Why do people always associate field hockey with females...FFS people...Men can play it as well...

[bosssmiley]

Why do people always associate field hockey with females...FFS people...Men can play it as well...

I think part of it is a school thing. Here in the UK there's long been a lazy assumption (largely stemming from school PE lessons) that hockey, lacrosse, gymnastics + netball = girl sports, whereas football, rugby, basketball + cricket = guy sports.

It seems to boil down to a contact vs. non-contact sport divide. Sum it up as: "Young ladies don't do shoving and rolling around in mud." (hah!)


Well, we're 5 in our group. We have all more or less the same outlook with the game (we play D&D 3.5). All except for him.

He comes from playing AD&D, and is probably used to a different style of game. But it's beyond that. He has attitudes towards the game that make the rest uncomfortable. He plays all his characters the same (like a frenzied barbarian). He gets overexcited in the combats but disappears in the roleplaying parts, usually doesn't even speak and browses the manuals.

He is a problem player, and the rest of the group all agree in this. We're not having fun with him on our table and he doesn't seem to be having fun either, because we clash all the time with the different playing styles. Plus we have a potential replacement for him.

So we're seriously thinking of getting rid of him.

Hmmm, sounds a little like my gaming group that. :smallconfused:

Simple answer:

Talk to the player about his gaming style and how it causes difficulties for the group. If the guy's been around the block (as my reading of your post implies), he'll see the problem himself and work on it.
If that doesn't work, then mention that you have another potential player lined up who might gel with the current group's playing style better (gently warning him he's on notice). This will require him to make the decision for himself to man up or get out.
If that also fails, then you have to part ways as gamers. But don't - under any circumstances - Dear John him.

I'm totally, deadly serious on that last point. If you ain't got the balls and common courtesy to drop a player to his face then gaming has taught you very little, and I don't want to believe you're that type of guy FdL. Decent people don't hide behind passive-aggressive mediated communication (phone, text, email, letters, etc.) when something unpleasant has to be done. They grab the nettle and have the courage and character to drop a player to his face, take the tantrum, and then move on.

If you think I'm wrong, please tell me. I can only speak from my own experience here (to whit: several players and GMs let go for whatever reason, most still mates). Then do the right thing (for your group and your friendship with this problem player).

[trollhammeren]

We have a similar situation here too. The way that we get rid of the guy is that we simply dont tell him when we are playing and we avoid him like the plague on the day were playing. I suppose it only really works for us cause we dont have a set gaming night, we play whenever the group is free to play. You could always just go with the "Theres 4 of us and 1 of him" situation, but have someone tell him in the other room, so he doesnt get humiliated as someone else said above, but if he does get violent or anything the rest of the group will just be next door.

[Tom_Violence]

I'm totally, deadly serious on that last point. If you ain't got the balls and common courtesy to drop a player to his face then gaming has taught you very little, and I don't want to believe you're that type of guy FdL. Decent people don't hide behind passive-aggressive mediated communication (phone, text, email, letters, etc.) when something unpleasant has to be done. They grab the nettle and have the courage and character to drop a player to his face, take the tantrum, and then move on.

I'm glad you said that. It doesn't sound like the guy is Satan himself, so he deserves at least the decency of being told in person. Anything else is cowardice, plain and simple, and people should be better than that. And it really is not a habit that you want to get into.

[evisiron]

Just to mention something similar happened not to long ago in my group. We had a player who was impatient when the focus was not on him, turned up late, fell asleep (or tried to) during plot or situation discriptions then pester other player as to what was going on, swore violently at other players in and out of character, did stupid things, had his character do stupid things etc etc.

As you can see, this made the game less enjoyable for the other players, and harder for me to DM. I basically talked to the other players, and they agreed. I concluded it with "Does anyone want ... to stay in this group?". No one said yes. I played to tell him in person, but another player (who had known him for much longer) bumped into him in the bar, and told him he was out.

Did not see the guy for ages, and my game ended.However, while I was on holiday the other running game closed down and the other two players started their own games.. which included the other player. When I had returned, I was invited to these games, but had to put up with this player, who, as it turned out, blamed me entirely from the ejection from the group, saying he had talked to everyone else and that no-one had said they wanted him out of the group.

The bad vibe continued until I cornered him and discussed what had happened. He seemed to feel I had a grudge against him, but when I explained this was not true, he seemed to calm down. Now things are basically ok.

Feel free to analyse how this could have gone better, and if that helps your situation, great.

[RAGE KING!]

I play in that table (and often DM). Roleplaying situations wont work, cause thats not his problem. Its not that he does stupid/senseless things; its just that he WANTS to do them, but when the party convinces him not to; he just sits like... angry... the rest of the day and acts like if we had ofended him or something. The problem its not WHAT he does in the table, but the MOOD we have tu put up with.

PS: Also, he only plays stereotypes. And thinks he lives in a Die Hard movie.

one very important question: Are you guys friends with him. I have a friend who does all sorts of stupid things and other stuff, but we work it out, and its all fine.

[FdL]

Why do people always associate field hockey with females...FFS people...Men can play it as well...

Well, it's the same with soccer in the US. It's mostly played by girls in school, whereas most everyone around the world would consider it a sport for men. It's related to the way a sport fits into a given country's culture. Same with baseball here, it's played mostly in high school and not very seriously.


I think part of it is a school thing. Here in the UK there's long been a lazy assumption (largely stemming from school PE lessons) that hockey, lacrosse, gymnastics + netball = girl sports, whereas football, rugby, basketball + cricket = guy sports.


It has some of that, because girls in high school tend to play it as a sport, whereas guys usually play mostly rugby (or soccer, but everyone plays soccer as a passtime here).

It also has to do with the overwhelming succes of our "Las Leonas" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Leonas) (Argentinas female field hockey national team). They are known worldwide to have a great level, and obviously the fact that the women's hockey team got famous reflects that in Argentina it's played more by women. It also perpetuates the phenomenon, because girls will follow them and start playing inspired by the team.



Simple answer:

If that also fails, then you have to part ways as gamers. But don't - under any circumstances - Dear John him.


I take the "Dear John" refers to writing him a "letter of dismissal".



I'm totally, deadly serious on that last point. If you ain't got the balls and common courtesy to drop a player to his face then gaming has taught you very little, and I don't want to believe you're that type of guy FdL. Decent people don't hide behind passive-aggressive mediated communication (phone, text, email, letters, etc.) when something unpleasant has to be done. They grab the nettle and have the courage and character to drop a player to his face, take the tantrum, and then move on.


Well, I for one am against doing it the cowardly way. I understand what you say and agree with you. It's precisely why I'm (we're) looking for advice here, because I really don't think it's fair or downright decent to hide from the guy or to fool him around. These things have to be told in person and straight.

Also Sisqui's advice was very sensible. It would be best if talked alone by someone that's closer to him. One of the guys is more friends with him than we are. He still agrees with the rest. We should see if he's willing to do the talking.



If you think I'm wrong, please tell me. I can only speak from my own experience here (to whit: several players and GMs let go for whatever reason, most still mates). Then do the right thing (for your group and your friendship with this problem player).

Yours is a sound advice, Bosssmiley, thanks for that.


one very important question: Are you guys friends with him. I have a friend who does all sorts of stupid things and other stuff, but we work it out, and its all fine.

Good question. I'm not friends with him. In fact, together with another guy we were only a recent addition to the group, while the other three had been playing together before. That's why I don't feel the right to tell him off myself right now, even if I'm one of the two persons that DM.

I also don't think that he's a bad guy, I just don't like him very much. About the possibility of keeping him and trying to change his style, well, I don't know if he has it in himself. The other guys in the group have been playing longer with him and say that it's not likely.

But the thing about this option is the fact that he has a right of not liking our playing style either, so even if he can change his ways, what's the point if he's not going to have fun doing it?

It's a very uncomfortable situation, because you have to confront people with what you think, and it's always easier not to, and putting up with stuff. I think it's very aggressive to be kicked out of a group, and that it must feel awful, thats why it's difficult to do, I don't want to make him feel bad.
But well cowardice should not be used as an excuse, especially when you can't hide how things are. This situation is very evident, and its symptoms pop up almost in each of his turns. They are collective "rolleyes" situations where we all know what everyone is thinking and try to just deal with him in the best possible way. But we sometimes lose our patience and snap at him, then he gets angry and resentful and all, but he doesn't change.

It may even have been brought on more explicitly in some of these occasions.

[Faramir]

One person, not a group, should tell him that the group has decided that his style of play and theirs aren't really compatible in this campaign. Say you're all really sorry but have decided to ask him to leave this game.

Don't say "you're a bad player". He'll still be upset but this is a more neutral way of phrasing it and having one person say it doesn't seem like you're ganging up.

Note that this is the "least bad" way I can think of presenting it. There really isn't a good way.

[horseboy]

"Young ladies don't do shoving and rolling around in mud." (hah!)

At least not without you having to pay a cover charge :smallbiggrin:

But no, seriously, the most diplomatic way would be to find a "kick in the door" style game going on in the area. Then introduce him to that crowd. Of course, it doesn't sound like that's possible. So, yeah go ahead and have his friends talk to him.

[Logic]

Call the police on him mid-session.

Sorry Tom, but that is what you do to a TERRIBLE DM that thinks you are not roleplaying your "curse" properly, and refuses to leave your house.

[Green Bean]

I'll throw in my vote for talking it over with him. Be polite and reasonable. Remember, just because the guy plays violent characters with shot fuses doesn't mean the player is. I wouldn't recommend having the DM do it, though, unless it's made totally clear that the whole group is behind him. Having him convinced it's all the fault of some jerk DM probably won't help in the forgiveness department. And if that doesn't work? Have everyone pick their noses for the entire session. If you're lucky, he'll leave in disgust. :smallwink:

[Elliot Kane]

The person who runs the group should tell him to his face or by phone that he's out, IMO. I've had to do that myself before, and it's a horrible thing, but it's the only way to fully explain to the player WHY they are no longer welcome to participate.

There's no reason to end up on bad terms with the person if you do it that way, because the situation you describe really can't be any fun for them, either.

Make it clear it's no judgement on him as a person, just that you feel the clash in playing styles is too great and the result is no fun for anyone.

If he asks for another chance, by all means give it to him - on the understanding that he'll change his ways. If he fails to do so, it should make the next conversation a lot easier.

[dungeon_munky]

We had much the same problem. We solved it when the player in question went out of town for a couple months. Er...come to think of it, he hasn't come back, and we haven't actually dealt with it yet. Uh oh...

[TSGames]

Before you start DMing the next session, announce that the group will be reduced by one before the playing starts and that everyone in the room should know what that means. If your players don't immediately start fighting to death, then you've done something wrong.

[Keymort]

I'd probly go with, playing one more game with him... and at the end, taking him aside from everyone else and basically saying:
"This doesn't work does it? You play ADnD, and play for all the fighting and stuff, while we're playing for the RPing.
Your a nice guy and all of that, it's just that your style of play really doesn't match my Dming"

That way, neither he, nor you, are put onto the "bad" side, it's done all private like cleanly and noone gets offended.

I really ought to have read more than 3 posts before I said this though.

EDIT: I had to reply to this

Well, it's the same with soccer in the US. It's mostly played by girls in school, whereas most everyone around the world would consider it a sport for men. It's related to the way a sport fits into a given country's culture. Same with baseball here, it's played mostly in high school and not very seriously.



It has some of that, because girls in high school tend to play it as a sport, whereas guys usually play mostly rugby (or soccer, but everyone plays soccer as a passtime here).


LOL. You obviously DON'T live in Grafton. = Massive hole with no DnD what-so-ever, and most the girls play rugby/hockey, and most the boys play hockey too (mostly the "lower class" people don't play sports (as in, organised sports).. Dunno why. It's pretty cheap so I doubt its affordability)

[Indon]

I'd tell him of the problem, so as to remove all doubt, then give him one last chance.

Something to the tune of "Your playstyle doesn't really fit in with that of the rest of the group. Here are some suggestions on how to improve, and if things continue this session like they have been, you won't be invited to the next session."

[PlatinumJester]

We hate you because you're a loser who never brings the Mountain Dew.

[Sean92k]

We hate you because you're a loser who never brings the Mountain Dew.And you dont sing 'Fly by night' very well either

[PlatinumJester]

Yeah Just filling up the 10 letter limit

[smellie_hippie]

I weigh in with the "tell it to him straight" approach. You can see if his friend is able to do so gently, but any adult/semi-adult should be reasonable to understand that they are detracting from the enjoyment of the game.

If he wants to play a stupid berserk Barbarian with a great-axe... go play playstation. If your group is more interested in roleplaying, diplomacy checks and subtle intrigue... he needs to get on board or find a new crew.

[Athavulf]

In my experience (26 years of D&D experience) there is nothing wrong with communicating with a player that they are no longer wanted in a game group via an email. I had to do just that 2 years ago due to my time constraints.

I don’t know how other DM’s go about running there games but here’s how I go about it. I develop a story I want to tell in a very sketchy form. I write a letter to be posted on a board with the campaign world choice, available races/classes, the basics of the story background, and the house rules I use to run my campaigns. I inform the potential players up front that the way I run a campaign is that I am a writer and they the characters who through their actions help me to flesh out the play that is unfolding. I also inform potential players that the play style is a mix of roleplaying and kick-in-the-door and that they must build characters that will work well together if they are to survive. I use the point buy system to keep things fair and if a feat from outside the PHP is to be used it has to pass the smell test first. I am very detailed when I talk about my campaign so that players know what they are getting themselves in to. I do not use modules but rather flesh out encounters to some extent and then fill in the gaps as I go. I work hard at my campaigns because I enjoy the comments of ‘cool’ or ‘oh crap’ that I get from my players as they encounter situations and monsters. In my opinion it is not high ability scores or feats that make the game enjoyable but rather the feeling of ‘wow’ that a good DM can bring out in players if they do their homework.

Back on track - I gathered the group by posting on a board and I ended up with 13 players. In my original post I informed all potential players that I planned to accept all players and then whittle it down to 6 players. There were several players that just didn’t fit in but one guy in particular made himself a pain in the back side.

In one encounter the party was in a series of dry river beds with steep walls and they were ambushed by goblins firing down on them from the high ground on one side. Due to their position the goblins had ¾ cover and this one fellow was frustrated by his failed attempts at skewering these lowly goblins with arrows fired from his short bow. He informed me that he was going to arc his shot in order to reduce the benefit of cover the goblins were receiving. I asked him if his character had the required feat to do so (there is such a feat but I can not recall the name of it). He said no but that all archers were trained to do so and that he himself could do it because he was an archer. I informed him that just because he possessed the skill it did not extend to his PC. He argued for a bit and then fumed when I moved on to the next character.

These kinds of things happened all too often in the first three sessions in which he took part. It slowed the progression of the campaign and also put everyone on notice that he had built his PC as the ultimate killing machine with no social skills at all. As stated before he would attempt to use feats which he did not possess and this was probably due the lack of feats in AD&D forcing DM’s to make up some rules for their campaigns. While I have played all versions of D&D I like D&D 3.5 the most as it allows for an excellent framework for answering questions of “I want to do this but there’s no rule for it what do you recommend DM”? But even with me explaining that there was a feat or skill for what he wanted to do and that he could not do it because he did not possess it he would still have fits.

After the first 3 sessions I selected four players that I noticed got on well together and fit what I was looking for in players for my campaign. These were my hand picked core players and I polled them for information on each other and on the other players. Based on their feedback I handed out ‘thanks but no thank you’ emails to the remaining invitees. Most accepted the emails graciously and went there way and some even thanked me for the consideration and stated that they could see how their own play style just didn’t gel with the others. But this one fellow was very angry about being asked to leave and wanted to know who had said what. I informed him of what I had done and that it was in the interest of my campaign to select them and that I gave them the option of selecting the players for the remaining 2 slots. I further informed him that though I was the DM my players also had the right to play with others they enjoyed being around. After an exhaustive exchange of emails in which I detailed things that he had done to make the sessions less enjoyable for everyone involved he went from angry, to defensive, and finally to accepting and he said thanks and let me know that if I ever decided to run a campaign more his style that I should drop him a line. Though I never have run that type of campaign if I did I would not have a problem with contacting him. Different people just respond differently to rejection and that’s the bottom line.

Perhaps some of you think that the email method was a less than manly way of asking someone to leave but due to work and family taking up most of my time I have precious little time for wasting at the game table and thus chose to speak to him on the off time via email. We were not friends to start so I did not communicate with the fellow other than at sessions and by email when I had something to say to the group or when I requested feedback. In addition, there is not much manly about sitting around a table drinking soda, eating, chips and rolling dice. If you want manly then I point you in the direction of the U.S. Army Recruiter where you can join up to be an Infantry Combat Medic. Enough said ladies and gents.

[Joe Greene]

Heh, count your blessings.. we've got a guy in our group who is constantly overrunning everyone else, taking control of the game and cutting out the other players.. He's my neighbor (sort of) and worse, we are both Board of Directors in our Home Owners Association... Getting rid of him (especially considering his vindictive psycho wife) would be a royal nightmare.. so the GM is considering moving the game back to his house.. 20 miles away.... total PITA situation...
We've even tried getting it through to him what he's doing.. but it's not sinking in... ugh...
:smallwink:

[Arameus]

Ye gods, have you not fired him yet? Is he that unstable?

Unless you honestly, seriously, totally fear violent reprisal, and I do mean violent and not just a verbal altercation, then after your next session you take him out to the grassy field and shoot him yourself take him aside (or the DM should, though I assumed you were he) and politely tell him that the group has decided to replace him with another player. That's the mature, forthright way of doing it.

Do NOT do it in any impersonal manner such as a letter or, God forbid, e-mail. Do NOT dismiss him while standing in a line with the other players across the room from him. Do NOT do it over the phone. That just makes you look like you didn't have the guts to do it man-to-man, and I'd agree with that assumption. One-on-one, privately, after your next session. Period.

[FdL]

Well, we played again yesterday, after about month since last time. As we hadn't done anything furthering the cause of kicking him out, we ended up telling him to come. Coincidentally, he always seems to get very excited at the prospect of playing (too much for my taste, because he sends messages to my cell phone, last time they were like six in a row). :smallannoyed:

I thought, we thought with the player who also doubles as the other DM and whose house we play in, to allow him to play and deal with it later. I thought this session could be well used too analyze his behaviour and see how bad it really is.

To me, it was just additional proof that I don't want to play with that guy (read on for a particular situation).



In one encounter the party was in a series of dry river beds with steep walls and they were ambushed by goblins firing down on them from the high ground on one side. Due to their position the goblins had ¾ cover and this one fellow was frustrated by his failed attempts at skewering these lowly goblins with arrows fired from his short bow. He informed me that he was going to arc his shot in order to reduce the benefit of cover the goblins were receiving. I asked him if his character had the required feat to do so (there is such a feat but I can not recall the name of it). He said no but that all archers were trained to do so and that he himself could do it because he was an archer. I informed him that just because he possessed the skill it did not extend to his PC. He argued for a bit and then fumed when I moved on to the next character.




As stated before he would attempt to use feats which he did not possess and this was probably due the lack of feats in AD&D forcing DM’s to make up some rules for their campaigns. While I have played all versions of D&D I like D&D 3.5 the most as it allows for an excellent framework for answering questions of “I want to do this but there’s no rule for it what do you recommend DM”? But even with me explaining that there was a feat or skill for what he wanted to do and that he could not do it because he did not possess it he would still have fits.


Well, something very similar happened last session. It always does. It has to do with him wanting to do crazy things which are not covered by the rules (which he mostly ignores because he has never read the manuals.

It seems that doing those antics is what makes the game fun for him, judging from the reactions he gets when I squeeze my brain trying to translate whatever he comes up with into rules. More or less coherent, fair rules which IMHO are what make D&D a game and not a narrative, godmodding playground type thing.

Of course, he never agrees with me, because in a childlike way, he only wants things to go his way and succeed.

When I heard him explaining what he wanted to do, it was one of those "here we go again", :rolleyes: moment. :(

Last time he was in front of a hole in the floor, which was above an exact hole in the lower level. As an enemy was approaching, next to him was a female NPC. He had tied a rope to an iron thing protruding from the side of the hole. He wanted to (get this) grab the NPC and holding the rope, throw themselves into the whole, where they would "naturally" swing inwards to the floor below, next to the hole in the lower level.

Now to me it's a little complex to simulate these things in a proper way, because of my DMing style makes use of as many rules as possible as a way to regulate the players' interaction with the world. I asessed this particular action as difficult to pull off, with many things that could go wrong, so we'd need several skill or ability checks. Mind you, as always I discussed this openly with him and the other players, to try to reach consensus with the rest of the group.

Well, I proposed that grabbing another character who was ready in battle wouldn't be an instant thing and that there would be a check to make, as she would naturally tend to keep her place in the battlefield, especially if she wasn't aware of his plan. I also thought of other things, like the rope holding their weight, the knot, how his character could drop her into the hole if he wasn't strong enough, the swing, etc.

He kinda agreed, after some discussion and help from some of the other players. Of course, when he rolled for the first check and failed, he got angry and pouting and stopped talking, only to make complaints about how we do things and all.

I don't know at which point I got fed up and snapped at him, telling him that this was the way I handled things and that I was the DM, and that for these things they had to trust my judgment because he couldn't just pull off whatever came into his mind. I think it was when I was looking in the books for a way to solve another situation.

I'm new at DMing, I haven't memorized all the rules and their interactions, and I have a style of DMing of which there's a possibility that some people don't like I guess.
I'm far from being the perfect DM, but I'm the one at the seat, and we've all agreed to that.

So I really don't like to have to put up with that kind of crap. None of the other players does things like that or takes those attitudes. I might be wrong but I think D&D is not about personal pride or success in the spotlight.

Then he gets passive-aggresive, or he plays the pooor victim of the table. He kinda apologized later, but I have no doubt this will happen over and over again.

So I'm really wanting to stop playing with this guy. More than before. I don't want to have to argue with people, I don't want to get angry and people getting angry at me over a game. So we'll see how we do it. Back to square one, with a vengeance.



Perhaps some of you think that the email method was a less than manly way of asking someone to leave but due to work and family taking up most of my time I have precious little time for wasting at the game table and thus chose to speak to him on the off time via email. We were not friends to start so I did not communicate with the fellow other than at sessions and by email when I had something to say to the group or when I requested feedback. In addition, there is not much manly about sitting around a table drinking soda, eating, chips and rolling dice. If you want manly then I point you in the direction of the U.S. Army Recruiter where you can join up to be an Infantry Combat Medic. Enough said ladies and gents.

Not about manliness. To me it's about respect and politeness. Though in this particular case, I'm honestly finding myself not caring too much for that due to these latest developments.

[OverdrivePrime]

You've got to bring this to a close Fdl, or this schmuck is going to continue to ruin your game night, time after time. Just promise yourself to talk to the guy by the end of the week, or before the next game, whichever comes first. It's daunting and horribly awkward, but after you've had a few games without this guy, you'll be glad that you went through with it.

[valadil]

Admittedly I've only had time to skim this thread, but have you tried compromising with this player? I realize that you're trying to boot him in the nicest way possible, but it's still a rude awakening if there hasn't been any indication that he isn't fitting in with the group. Not a lot of players are malicious enough to want to disrupt the GM, so he may want to work on what's bothering you. And maybe if he starts to learn the rules better or participate in roleplaying, you'll let the rules slide a bit when he wants to do some badass maneuver that only works in Hollywood.