Am I that guy?

[Trandir]

Well I got to the first session of the campaing. It was a lot of fun for everyone. At the end of the session when we and the DM where discussing about the fun moments, sharing advices and playing the "what if" game.
At that point I discovered that I had been an awfull company according to them:
I clashed with the DM for everything, as far as I can tell the only occurences where for the passive perception that I thought would include proficiency bonus and the dwarven advantage vs poison that should be applied to not get drunken. I might have do more but these are the only ones that we could remember.
I wasn't intrested nor active enough, fair point I am not an extrovert and not a very energic person, two other players by my standards where hyper active.
I was sighing the whole time I did not realize that and no one made a problem out of it untill the end of the session.

For these reasons I killed the mood of the game that ended about 2h earlyer than scheduled. After I left the other discussed and about 1 hour later I was kicked out of the party.

Was I That Guy?
I like to play D&D and other similar games but if I was That Guy the whole time I have to do something about that.

[Particle_Man]

Have you ever played with other groups? If so, how did it go?

[KorvinStarmast]

At that point I discovered that I had beenan awfull company according to them:

I clashed with the DM for everything,
Possible that guy issue if you two cannot work it out between you two.

I wasn't interested nor active enough, fair point I am not an extrovert and not a very energic person, two other players by my standards where hyper active. Might be an expectations mismatch, or it might be another bit of "bad fit" for playing style. It happens.

I was "breathing noisly" (english is not my mother language so I do not know the word that you use when you exhale heavly usually it is associated with disappointing annoyance ecc...) the whole time I did not realize that and no one made a problem out of it untill the end of the session. Sigh or sighing is the term I think you are looking for.

For these reasons I killed the mood of the game that ended about 2h earlyer than scheduled. After I left the other discussed and about 1 hour later I was kicked out of the party. What, they didn't tell you to your face? Seems like a jerk move.

Was I That Guy? You were to them, it appears.

I like to play D&D and other similar games but if I was That Guy the whole time I have to do something about that. Or maybe the next group you try to play with will be a better fit for you, and not hyper active.

My advice;
1. Don't Argue With the DM during play!
If something doesn't seem to be right to you as a player, make the point once "I thought it works like this" (explain how you think it works) and then see if the DM agrees, or rules a different way.
Either way, Accept the DM ruling and play on.
The other players came to play, not to watch you and the DM argue.

2. Read number 1 again.

3. Find a new group, and best wishes for a fun game. :smallsmile:

[Trandir]

My advice;
1. Don't Argue With the DM during play!
If something doesn't seem to be right to you as a player, make the point once "I thought it works like this" (explain how you think it works) and then see if the DM agrees, or rules a different way.
Either way, Accept the DM ruling and play on.
The other players came to play, not to watch you and the DM argue.

2. Read number 1 again.

3. Find a new group, and best wishes for a fun game. :smallsmile:

First of all thanks for the advice.

About the number 1 it went down like that:

DM: Y'all give me your passive perception
Me: It is 10+perception mod right?
DM: no just +Wis mod
Me: I am pretty sure that you can include the proficiency mod
DM: I do not like rules lawyers
Me: ok. 13 then
Resume playing

Me: I jug the wiskey bottle
DM: ok Con ST to not get wasted
Me taking 2 d20
DM: why are you taking 2 d20?
Me: Dwarfs get advantage vs poison so I get advantage against it
DM: Alcohol is not a poison
Me: there is alcohol intoxication right?
DM: alcohol is not a poison
Me: ok, roll 1d20 and the game resumes

It seems resonable.

And I have another group that will begin shortly after (fun fact 5 out of 6 members me included got kicked out by this DM)

[Yunru]

First of all thanks for the advice.

About the number 1 it went down like that:

DM: Y'all give me your passive perception
Me: It is 10+perception mod right?
DM: no just +Wis mod
Me: I am pretty sure that you can include the proficiency mod
DM: I do not like rules lawyers
Me: ok. 13 then
Resume playing

Me: I jug the wiskey bottle
DM: ok Con ST to not get wasted
Me taking 2 d20
DM: why are you taking 2 d20?
Me: Dwarfs get advantage vs poison so I get advantage against it
DM: Alcohol is not a poison
Me: there is alcohol intoxication right?
DM: alcohol is not a poison
Me: ok, roll 1d20 and the game resumes

It seems resonable.

And I have another group that will begin shortly after (fun fact 5 out of 6 members me included got kicked out by this DM)

From the sounds of it, the rest of the table was That Guy.

[Sigreid]

If the DM kicked 5 out of 6 players, he didn't want to DM for this group anyway. My suspicion would be he already knew who he was replacing you 5 with. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

[Dork_Forge]

First of all thanks for the advice.

About the number 1 it went down like that:

DM: Y'all give me your passive perception
Me: It is 10+perception mod right?
DM: no just +Wis mod
Me: I am pretty sure that you can include the proficiency mod
DM: I do not like rules lawyers
Me: ok. 13 then
Resume playing

Me: I jug the wiskey bottle
DM: ok Con ST to not get wasted
Me taking 2 d20
DM: why are you taking 2 d20?
Me: Dwarfs get advantage vs poison so I get advantage against it
DM: Alcohol is not a poison
Me: there is alcohol intoxication right?
DM: alcohol is not a poison
Me: ok, roll 1d20 and the game resumes

It seems resonable.

And I have another group that will begin shortly after (fun fact 5 out of 6 members me included got kicked out by this DM)

That sounds more like a DM not very familiar with the rules and possibly being embarrassed about that being highlighted, which is his issue not yours (as you didn't really seem to make much of a fuss) and the group just... didn't seem like a good fit. Sometimes people mistake introverts for not being interested which is unfortunate, but being aware of these things and actively looking to improve yourself as a player is a very good sign.

Hope things go better with your new group!

[Contrast]

It's going to be difficult for us to give advice here as we're obviously getting your version of events which it would appear is very different to the version of events the other players are recounting.

If the problem was so apparent that they called the session early and immediately voted to kicked you after the first session I'm surprised it wasn't more evident at the time and that the atmosphere was one of everyone enjoying themselves and the DM chatting with you about the game afterward.

It could be that there were other issues (which may or may not involve you) and they were using this as a pretense but who knows. Were these strangers, friends? If you know any of them outside of the context of the game I would honestly and openly ask their thoughts (not to try and get back in - it would appear that bridge has burned) to get context on the matter.

Have you played in previous groups? It may be worth discussing with them.


fun fact 5 out of 6 members me included got kicked out by this DM

In all my time playing RPGs I've seen/heard of a few people kicked out. Groups fall apart or sometimes people leave but in my experience its exceedingly uncommon for people to actually get kicked out. 5 people by a single DM seems like its probably a DM thing rather than a player thing. Either way if you've already got another group, just give them a heads up its something you're conscious of and if they have any problems or concerns with how you're playing, they can come talk to you. Problem solved.

[Trandir]

It's going to be difficult for us to give advice here as we're obviously getting your version of events which it would appear is very different to the version of events the other players are recounting.

If the problem was so apparent that they called the session early and immediately voted to kicked you after the first session I'm surprised it wasn't more evident at the time and that the atmosphere was one of everyone enjoying themselves and the DM chatting with you about the game afterward.


That's the problem. I asked them what was the problem and I put them in the OP almost word by word.
Like many others I thought that I did a pretty good job but if I was so nasty that the DM call it a night earlyer than he planned there must be something wrong.
The only problem they listed when asked are: not enough "energy", the sighing, those 2 "discussions" and apparent low interest.
And to quote the DM: "We discussed and we are not interested in playing with you again. Good luck with the next party"
To not get a single second chance there is a problem with either me or all of them.

And strangers on the internet are probably more objective than me when it comes to judge my actions.

[Contrast]

And strangers on the internet are probably more objective than me when it comes to judge my actions.

The issue is sometimes (usually in fact) its the things that we don't notice/register we're doing that are the issue.

I've been in 2 games where someone was disinvited from future sessions (both after their first session). The first one was an old friend of the DMs who rolled his dice so that others couldn't see them and mysteriously never failed a roll and crit about every third roll. I assume he thought none of the rest of us would notice. The second politely asked the host if he could smoke weed and was politely told no and no more was said of the matter. After the game the host told the DM they were very unhappy they'd bought drugs into their house and demanded they were disinvited, no ifs or buts - their house their rules.

I also remember a discussion with a housemate at university whereby her boyfriend was banned from hanging out at our house because he had simply incredible BO.

In all those cases if you asked the person why they were no longer invited I doubt they would have any idea themselves (nor would them describing events to strangers on the internet necessarily give any insight into what had gone wrong). I wasn't party to the conversation the DMs/gf had with the people but in the first and third cases particularly, I highly doubt the person was given an accurate reason why they weren't being invited back. In a perfect world everyone would have honest conversations and everything would get resolved out in the open but in the real world that's often just not going to be the case.

I can sit here and tell you being a little introverted and occasionally sighing is no reason to kick someone out of a game. That said, if someone was sitting at my table and every time another player took too long or made a move they considered not optimal they sighed and rolled their eyes I would quickly lose patience with them. I'm not saying that's what you were doing, just that if that person came to this forum they'd probably be telling a very similar story :smalltongue:


As I said, it sounds like kicking people out is more a pattern for the DM than getting kicked out is a pattern for you so I wouldn't worry too much about it. My point is just that if this is something you are concerned about, advice from people who know you/have played with you is likely to be much more insightful than anything we're going to be able to drum up :smallbiggrin:

[Frogsama]

Here is the thing. Usually, when there is a problem with a player you would just talk to them and figure out a solution. If he doesn't want to change or disregards any feedback, then you can part ways.

With the anonymity of the internet you can just kick a guy that you didn't like and get a new one. It is a shame really. Thats why it is almost better to find groups online or join with a friend to have a "package deal" situation.

So yeah, you might have been someone that is not the best to play with, but nothing that can't be fixed with a talk

[JakOfAllTirades]

Some groups aren't worth playing with, and this sounds like one of them.

Write them off, consider yourself lucky to be rid of them, and find a group that doesn't behave this way.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

If they didn't try to talk with you and figure it out then you did nothing wrong.

You can't make sure people will not feel bad if nobody tells you that.

The fact they throw you out without talking first is a bad. I will not stay in a group that do this kind of things(A fresh example - I left yesterday a group that did the same thing).

[Tvtyrant]

In all my time playing RPGs I've seen/heard of a few people kicked out. Groups fall apart or sometimes people leave but in my experience its exceedingly uncommon for people to actually get kicked out. 5 people by a single DM seems like its probably a DM thing rather than a player thing. Either way if you've already got another group, just give them a heads up its something you're conscious of and if they have any problems or concerns with how you're playing, they can come talk to you. Problem solved.

I kicked out a player who was a friend of mine a few years ago. They played like they wanted a solo adventure, playing a Thri-Kreen Swarm Druid in an all human setting (after much begging) and then literally chasing bats around while the rest of the party adventured. By the end of the session he was in a different town from the party and was making a business as an exterminator, and was interrupting the game play to make me play out business interactions (the other three players were trying to find a cult.)

That is the only time I have had a working group where I had to kick one person (I had one game where the entire group was terrible and I just cancelled after the first session but that is a bit different.)

[ff7hero]

Just for the record, if you're proficient in Perception, you get to add your proficiency bonus to Passive Perception.

Other than that, I'll echo the general consensus and say it sounds like you're better off.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Also for the record: alcohol is a poison by definition so if you have advantage on poison saves it applies to alcohol.

[Eldariel]

Impossible to say without actually having been there. Give it another go.

[Pex]

Taking you at your word, which itself is not meant to imply anything, . . . no. Something was happening that was against the rules which had a negative affect on your character; you are allowed to inquire about it and not be That Guy. The DM might be upset you were "correcting" him, but that's a matter of one's personal perception. Some DMs cannot admit or accept making an error and correcting it.

The sighing might be where the camel's straw lies. If you were sighing, the question is how often and when/why. Going with the poison and passive perception problem, perhaps you were sighing whenever a rule was broken but you didn't mention it verbally because it affected another character whether it hindered or gave an advantage. The rule break rubbed you the wrong way emotionally, and it came out as a sigh.

Being a rules lawyer can be detrimental to fun for the group, but there is another side to that coin. There are players who don't care about the rules. They like improvisation and want to do things to make a narrative. It's not about Rule of Cool but Rule of Drama. There are DMs who want to run games that way. For these players rules are superfluous. They can accept class levels determine your abilities, but they decide how the abilities work - not the rules. They hate anyone who says the rules don't allow them to do what they want to do and get huffy. If they're the only one in the group they quit the campaign blaming the DM/other players. If they're in the majority the "rules lawyer" is kicked out.

[loki_ragnarock]

I'd put myself in the "it's impossible to know without being there" camp.

Here's the thing. You might have been fine, surrounded by *******s. It happens sometimes.

Or you might have been surrounded by people that were fine. As fine people, when they provided feedback they may have been unwilling to simply say, "because you're an *******."


But here's the thing; it doesn't matter. One data point does not a trend make. Enjoy your new table and don't worry about it; unless you're getting kicked consistently, whether or not you're that guy is irrelevant. There simply aren't enough instances to make a proper judgement, or even to entertain the notion. If you get kicked from your new group, or you have a history of getting kicked from groups, or are consistently getting negative feedback from people who are hesitant to kick you, it's probably time to consider the question in more detail.
But without that? Eh, shrug, don't worry, move on. Enjoy the new table and do you, beaux.


If they didn't try to talk with you and figure it out then you did nothing wrong.

You can't make sure people will not feel bad if nobody tells you that.

The fact they throw you out without talking first is a bad. I will not stay in a group that do this kind of things(A fresh example - I left yesterday a group that did the same thing).

Mhhhmm… I disagree.

If the OP is a friend, yeah, of course take the time to do this. That's how you maintain friendships.

If the OP is someone they don't know about, there's no obligation to do this. When you work for a living and get to game in your spare time with a stranger, being able to look at the people you've managed to form a relationship with and say "Yay or nay" is fair game. They are under no obligation to spend their limited spare time with people who rub them the wrong way. For most working adults time is a currency they can't afford to waste.
This isn't a business setting. It's a handful of people trying to have some fun in their spare time: an exit interview isn't required.


Some groups aren't worth playing with, and this sounds like one of them.

Write them off, consider yourself lucky to be rid of them, and find a group that doesn't behave this way.
I suppose no longer having a choice helps.

But that attitude doesn't help the OP in the future if it turns out that he is, in fact, that guy. Take it as a data point. Don't worry about it too much in the present, but don't disregard it as a data point.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

.



Mhhhmm… I disagree.

If the OP is a friend, yeah, of course take the time to do this. That's how you maintain friendships.

If the OP is someone they don't know about, there's no obligation to do this. When you work for a living and get to game in your spare time with a stranger, being able to look at the people you've managed to form a relationship with and say "Yay or nay" is fair game. They are under no obligation to spend their limited spare time with people who rub them the wrong way. For most working adults time is a currency they can't afford to waste.
This isn't a business setting. It's a handful of people trying to have some fun in their spare time: an exit interview isn't required.

.
I meant something like.

"X can you stop that?"
After I say something like this to someone I give him time(a game or a half of a game if it was in the middle of the game) to fix it.

But I do tell him before.

I also work most of the time and the little time I have to myself I use for game and sleep.
But I will not kick someone out before he had a chance (unless it was something big like crossing someone red line) and I will not stay in a group that do stuff like this.


But different people have different approaches.



Anyway, OP, just look for a group that think of the game like you. Or start a new one.

[Sigreid]

One thing, I'm not sure that sighing is the right word the OP was looking for. Originally I think he said something like periodically breathing heavy. I've known people who habitually take noisy deep breaths and are not sighing. I doubt they even realize they are doing it, and it can be annoying.

[Kane0]

If you're asking the question 'Am I THAT guy?' there's a good chance you aren't. It implies enough self awareness to avoid the most common 'That guy' behaviour.

[Drache64]

DM: Y'all give me your passive perception
Me: It is 10+perception mod right?
DM: no just +Wis mod
Me: I am pretty sure that you can include the proficiency mod
DM: I do not like rules lawyers
Me: ok. 13 then
Resume playing

Me: I jug the wiskey bottle
DM: ok Con ST to not get wasted
Me taking 2 d20
DM: why are you taking 2 d20?
Me: Dwarfs get advantage vs poison so I get advantage against it
DM: Alcohol is not a poison
Me: there is alcohol intoxication right?
DM: alcohol is not a poison
Me: ok, roll 1d20 and the game resumes

CALM DOWN!

Just kidding, you sound like you'd be welcome at my table, heck if I'm the DM you are welcome to argue harder that alcohol is poison. Sounds like a toxic group. So much so I'm going to go make a post about this kind of group because I've seen 2 in my time.

[HappyDaze]

If you're asking the question 'Am I THAT guy?' there's a good chance you aren't. It implies enough self awareness to avoid the most common 'That guy' behaviour.

Unless asking that question is just a learned response to try to mentally assure oneself that they are not that guy when they really are that guy. Self-deception tends to have a low target number...

[col_impact]

Sounds more like you had a toxic DM who couldn't handle being called out for rules he got wrong and decided to treat you in a very rude fashion and jumped prematurely to player eviction. If the DM had a shred of social acumen he could have communicated his issues to you in a professional manner and kept you on as a player.

I know the DM is the final arbiter of the rules in the game he or she is running but there is simply no excuse for unprofessional behavior. A DM firing a player from the table for simply alerting the DM to a rule that they got wrong is bullying behavior.

[Ganryu]

Here's a thing. This is a hobby. We're here to have fun. If some jerks are making you worry this much out of game, begone thots.

[Arkhios]

From the basic rules:


Passive Checks
A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn’t involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the GM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster.

Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check:

10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check

If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.

For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.

The rules on hiding in the “Dexterity” section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules.

You had Passive Checks right, the DM didn't. All modifiers that normally apply include the proficiency.

Regarding alcohol and poison... technically, there's no absolute rule whether alcohol counts as poison or not, as far as I can remember. It seems reasonable to assume that it is a poisonous substance in real life, but in a game it's a DM's call.

It's completely reasonable to ask the DM what to apply, but if the DM gets so snappy about it, the DM has some serious social issues. The DM and the "Sonic-the-hedgehogs" were a group of Those Guys. Clearly not your type of group anyway.

[Knaight]

Keeping in mind that "that guy" is generally a group specific position in terms of behavior which will land you there, outside of some really exceptionally terrible behavior that ends up in gaming horror stories. That said, you're definitely that guy. Minimally involved players are irritating enough as is. Minimally involved players sighing periodically is irritating and feels judgmental and thus more irritating. Minimally involved players sighing periodically who suddenly find a bunch of motivation when they're arguing the GM's mechanical calls? That's past the irritating line and well into downright obnoxious.

Also, what connection did you even have with the DM prior to the game? This doesn't sounds like an existing friend group - it sounds like a number of strangers got together specifically to play some D&D. Most of the group clicked fairly well, but one person dragged it down for them, so they didn't schedule more games with that person. This sounds like it's happened multiple times - which, in the context of a group of near strangers, is pretty normal. This is especially true when it sounds like there's been a consistent stylistic difference between the first group and the second group made of people who bounced off the first group. Hopefully that difference means that none of you are "that guy" in the second group - and probably any member of the first group would be.

The "hyperactivity" you site as a conflict with members of the other group would probably be roughly as annoying as the inactivity seen by the other group. The mechanical combativeness is probably also roughly comparable, likely to be read as irritatingly conflict averse and apathetic - though probably not to the extent. The one true incomparable is the sighing, which is just flat out rude.

[Arkhios]

The one true incomparable is the sighing, which is just flat out rude.

Not everyone sighs, periodically or not, as an expression of boredom, mind you.

In fact, as the OP said, they didn't even notice they were doing it until someone pointed it out, after the session. The OP might've been unknowingly just tired. Or the game was set in a place with poor ventilation system (or lack of one). Lack of oxygen can make anyone yawning, a lot. Some people may be more tolerant to lower oxygen levels than others, and they might find it strange when someone else does it continuously; if you're accustomed to being extended periods of time in better ventilated interiors, it's even less likely to be intentional.
FWIW, I've had asthma since birth, I sure as hell know what I'm talking about when it's about breathing difficulties, and related issues.

It's only rude when it's done on purpose to express one's boredom.

And questioning a rule (or, rather, a DM's ruling) is no excuse to kick someone out of the group after just one session, especially when the person's previous knowledge of the said rule is based accurately on Rules As Written.

Inactivity may feel bad for the others, but the OP had a perfectly reasonable explanation for that. Social anxiety is not excuse to kick someone out. From anywhere, whether it's a game or some other event.

[Knaight]

Not everyone sighs, periodically or not, as an expression of boredom, mind you.

In fact, as the OP said, they didn't even notice they were doing it until someone pointed it out, after the session. The OP might've been unknowingly just tired. Or the game was set in a place with poor ventilation system (or lack of one). Lack of oxygen can make anyone sighing, a lot. Some people may be more tolerant to lower oxygen levels than others, and they might find it strange when someone else does it continuously; if you're accustomed to being extended periods of time in better ventilated interiors, it's even less likely to be intentional.

It's only rude when it's done on purpose to express one's boredom.

And questioning a rule (or, rather, a DM's ruling) is no excuse to kick someone out of the group after just one session, especially when the person's previous knowledge of the said rule is based accurately on Rules As Written.

Reduced to isolated instances and looked at in a vacuum none of these are necessarily that bad. Together though? Together they're a player that vacillates between inactive and disruptive. Yet somehow said player, by all appearances a stranger pulled for the game, is owed more than one session in the game before the rest of the group is allowed to dislike them and choose not to continue playing with them. They had one bad game, the player in question is why they had a bad game, and now out of some sense of fairness they have to throw another four hours down the drain and have another bad game with that player?

Screw. That.


Inactivity may feel bad for the others, but the OP told a perfectly reasonable reason for that. Social anxiety is not excuse to kick someone out. From anywhere, whether it's a game or some other event.
This whole framing of "kicking someone out" is dubious. The OP wasn't a regular member of the group, and membership is a pretty significant prerequisite to being kicked out of anything. The campaign was new, there's a level of provisional status that goes with that, and under that status the OP was determined not to be a good fit.

Having social anxiety is also not an open invite to any social group, whether they like you or not - and that's without getting into how "social anxiety" is a questionable read for being introverted and subdued, the stated reasons. Anxiety, introversion, being quiet, none of them mean you are owed the presence of other people. None of them mean that people are obligated to host you at a social event.

[Yunru]

It seems like a That Guy has entered the thread.
OP, compare yourself to the above. If you agree with what they wrote and how, you're probably That Guy. Otherwise, don't worry.

[Arkhios]

Reduced to isolated instances and looked at in a vacuum none of these are necessarily that bad. Together though? Together they're a player that vacillates between inactive and disruptive. Yet somehow said player, by all appearances a stranger pulled for the game, is owed more than one session in the game before the rest of the group is allowed to dislike them and choose not to continue playing with them. They had one bad game, the player in question is why they had a bad game, and now out of some sense of fairness they have to throw another four hours down the drain and have another bad game with that player?

Screw. That.


This whole framing of "kicking someone out" is dubious. The OP wasn't a regular member of the group, and membership is a pretty significant prerequisite to being kicked out of anything. The campaign was new, there's a level of provisional status that goes with that, and under that status the OP was determined not to be a good fit.

Having social anxiety is also not an open invite to any social group, whether they like you or not - and that's without getting into how "social anxiety" is a questionable read for being introverted and subdued, the stated reasons. Anxiety, introversion, being quiet, none of them mean you are owed the presence of other people. None of them mean that people are obligated to host you at a social event.

Obviously I can't speak for you, but for one, I don't live in a vacuum. I prefer to spend my time with other people, with different personalities, whether I like their little individual nuances or not. As such, I tend to take into account all the possibilities (that I can imagine) that may have been the cause for any irritating issues (if any), especially when I meet someone for the first time. I prefer to give everyone a second chance before I make any judgments.

Maybe you should try that sometimes?

[Knaight]

Obviously I can't speak for you, but for one, I don't live in a vacuum. I prefer to spend my time with other people, with different personalities, whether I like their little individual nuances or not. As such, I tend to take into account all the possibilities (that I can imagine) that may have been the cause for any irritating issues (if any), especially when I meet someone for the first time. I prefer to give everyone a second chance before I make any judgments.

Maybe you should try that sometimes?

Coincidentally enough I also don't live in a vacuum. I interact with lots of people, and like the vast majority of them - the default interaction path is stranger -> friendly acquaintance. Given the plethora of people I get along with just fine why should I go out of my way to spend more time interacting with the tiny subset that I don't like? Especially when I hit it off with everyone else there, and everyone else there also doesn't like that one person?

It would be another story if they had any meaningful connection whatsoever. A friend of a friend that I'll be interacting with more, sure, they're worth trying to get along with. A coworker in a group formed from a shared workplace, sure, they're worth trying to get along with. Some rando? Why bother?

Similarly from the OP's position, why try to stay in a group where everyone disliked spending time with me? Sure, maybe they all happened to misjudge some completely innocent personality trait in the exact same way, and sure, maybe that wouldn't happen in a second game. Or I could just find another group of strangers that I actually get along with. There's a case where "I don't fit in this group culture at all, time to keep trying" makes sense, but it needs a somewhat more compelling reason than "this is the particular group culture that I happened to encounter first when looking for a way to spend some free time". Similarly "I don't like this person, time to keep trying to get along with them" needs a more compelling reason than "otherwise I might have a slightly awkward interaction with a total stranger who I'll never see again". This should be water off a duck's back for everyone involved, and the only reason it isn't is that geek culture has a deeply warped relationship with exclusion.

[KorvinStarmast]

Self-deception tends to have a low target number... Nice one. I might oughta toss that into the old sig. :smallbiggrin:

I get along with just fine why should I go out of my way to spend more time interacting with the tiny subset that I don't like?
--snip--
This should be water off a duck's back for everyone involved, and the only reason it isn't is that geek culture has a deeply warped relationship with exclusion.Yep, Geek Social Fallacies ought to be required reading ... :smallcool:
You make some decent points.

That said, I feel some empathy for the OP: rejection is often painful. Sometimes it hurts less than others, but when one realizes that one has been excluded or rejected, it rarely-to-never feels good.

[Waterdeep Merch]

My gaming group is currently going through the excising/rehabilitation of two players that have been regulars for years. They've always been tied up in 'That Guy' problems. We've been vocal in the past about their problems and we've tried helping them on many occasions. This is the culmination of me, as our most consistent DM, having the equivalent of a nervous breakdown at the thought of DMing for them anymore at the beginning of this year, stalling two well-liked games so badly that I've hosted only five sessions total between them since. They used to be weekly.

I can't really guess what your problems are without seeing a session of your's in action, but here's some of the many things we tried with our two That Guys that did show improvement, even if we're reaching a breaking point due to this not being enough itself:

1. Engage the story. Seriously try to get into the narrative, try to form relationships with NPC's, make a point of remembering details and names. A lot of your bigger problems will evaporate if this is your primary aim.

2. Teamwork, teamwork, teamwork. Don't design your character in a vacuum, design them explicitly to work with the party. I don't just mean mechanically, either; figure out how you can design something of a friend for them. Forget alignment, forget in-game religion or race or any other details like that. Consider the other characters, consider what sort of person would be a likable friend to all of them, and design your character to be like that. There's more design space here then you'd guess. And for the love of Gygax, do not design a lone wolf of any sort.

3. Don't hog the spotlight. While you want to engage the story, don't do it alone. Make an earnest attempt to involve other players in whatever you're doing. Just like you'd hate to sit there for half an hour while another player goes through a solo adventure, consider that the others will feel the same way about you. Insist on getting their opinion on matters, and don't go anywhere too interesting without your friends.

[HappyDaze]

Nice one. I might oughta toss that into the old sig. :smallbiggrin:

My slow march towards immortality begins--now! <<<Oh, not yet? Well then...>>>

[Tvtyrant]

Obviously I can't speak for you, but for one, I don't live in a vacuum. I prefer to spend my time with other people, with different personalities, whether I like their little individual nuances or not. As such, I tend to take into account all the possibilities (that I can imagine) that may have been the cause for any irritating issues (if any), especially when I meet someone for the first time. I prefer to give everyone a second chance before I make any judgments.

Maybe you should try that sometimes?

This is a hobby, people do it for fun. If a person make the game unfun of course they are going to be looked down on or kicked out. No one is obligated to spend their free time dealing with someone that annoys them, that is what the rest of their life is for.

[Trandir]

Well the thread was about me being "That Guy" not if the DM and the rest of the party were in the right when they kicked me out. Obv they are, the fact alone that the sessions would take place at the DM's house would be enough to justify his decision. Also the party composition was this: DM, DM's boyfriend, DM's brother, DM's boyfriend's brother and me. Probably they would have kicked out any player that didn't meet all their standards.


Also today I completed the first session with the new party (everyone in it got rejected by the same DM) and we had fun and no one had problems, well one of the players is a bit of an actor/joker that leaves not that much space to the others but all the rest went smoothly.

Thanks to everyone that posted here and apparently I am not "That Guy" in this table

[Sigreid]

I think it's a safe bet that everyone is someone's That Guy.

[Magicspook]

Also today I completed the first session with the new party (everyone in it got rejected by the same DM) and we had fun and no one had problems, well one of the players is a bit of an actor/joker that leaves not that much space to the others but all the rest went smoothly.

Thanks to everyone that posted here and apparently I am not "That Guy"

Sounds nice :)

[KorvinStarmast]

Also today I completed the first session with the new party (everyone in it got rejected by the same DM) and we had fun and no one had problems, well one of the players is a bit of an actor/joker that leaves not that much space to the others but all the rest went smoothly.

Thanks to everyone that posted here and apparently I am not "That Guy" Glad to hear that it's going well.

[Bigmouth]

Yes, you were That Guy.

That doesn't mean anything about you or your playing though, beyond saying that you didn't fit with that particular group.
It also doesn't say much about that group either, beyond saying that they didn't find you a fit.

While I've never seen an actual vote/kick at a TTRPG, as someone who used to play/gm in 7+games a week at a gaming club, I have seen a ton of players who didn't fit in well at a given game/table. The most obnoxious player ever (who was sort of famous for it back in the eighties) used to frequent our club and get a lot of hate, but once you got past the loud explosive outbursts he was great fun, someone I actively sought out to game with. At some tables his extreme behavior might not just be tolerated but seen as a sign of his passion for the game and a more laid back game might be viewed as uncaring/uninterested. What I'm rambling around but not actually saying is that That Guy status isn't something that necessarily a badge we carry from game/table to game/table. It's possible to be That Guy at one table and be the greatest player ever at the next.

That said, not appearing to be interested is the silent killer. It can be completely innocent and probably it most often is just that, but I've found it can siphon enjoyment from other players and sap the GM's interest in running more than about anything. Sighing or yawning will make it even worse. It's something that if you suspect yourself doing it, you definitely should apologize to the GM, as lack of interest is something that a lot of GMs won't address simply because they feel that their game isn't worth it.