How do I deal with this player?

[Alent]

Okay, so I'm getting ready to DM a campaign for my group, and while I get all my campaign materials together, I reviewed all of the campaigns that failed prior to this thinking I'd try to better control or avoid scenarios that may have caused problems in them and came to a few observations.

The same player...

• ... consistently provokes arguments to interrupt roleplay.
• ... consistently brings the same Tabula Rasa Sociopathic RP persona to the table.
• ... deliberately splits off of the party as soon as we get to town.

I don't have a count of campaigns he's ended, but he actually made the group's usual DM stop DMing in the process of killing the most recent one.

Before I joined the group a few years ago they had a different DM who ran 2e and just went "knife to the back, make a new character" any time the offending player did any of the above. Honestly I'm thinking I should do the same, because the longer he goes between character deaths, the worse it gets. (To the point one of our group memes is "(player) died, it's gonna be a good campaign!") I don't want to tell him he can't play for reasons that float somewhere between the five geek social fallacies and reasonable treatment of friends.

The thread we see between all of his antics tends to be, in Dwarven parlance, small beard syndrome.

His arguments typically boil down to an effort to prevent others from overshadowing him. They can be dangerous as he has been known to deliberately sabotage campaigns as a passive aggressive protest over not getting his way.

His idea of roleplay is to leave the group behind and wander around and wordlessly glare at NPCs like a sociopath until the DM pulls the "no loitering" routine on him. He just... stalks random NPCs, refuses to identify the reason, and acts like we're being obtuse for finding the practice disturbing and disruptive.

I already know I'm going to have to assign him a character backstory and personal objective (he never has one of his own), but I'm having a really hard time coming up with ways to plan around his antics that don't involve pavlovian character death training or unhealthy and verisimilitude breaking use of the Bolster Beard spell.

Any suggestions for RP training an argumentative unRPer?

[Glimbur]

Talk to him. If that doesn't work, boot him. This is an OOC problem, don't try to solve it IC.

If you want some advice for the talking to, that's probably a good way for the thread to go. Personally, I would focus on how his actions make the rest of the group (and the DM) feel.

[WbtE]

What do the other players think of this guy?

[Alent]

Talk to him. If that doesn't work, boot him. This is an OOC problem, don't try to solve it IC.

If you want some advice for the talking to, that's probably a good way for the thread to go. Personally, I would focus on how his actions make the rest of the group (and the DM) feel.

That answers one of my concerns by itself. I was thinking of it as a mixed problem both OOC and IC just due to how it bleeds into IC, putting it in the realm of OOC makes it easier.

Is it best to confront a longer term OOC issue like this outside of the normal play session? (like before or after play ends) I feel uncomfortable with the idea of hitting the "pause play" button to make an issue of this mid-session.

We have raised the subject with him in the past and it's usually quickly brushed past or justified with "I roleplay myself!"

What do the other players think of this guy?

Our usual DM isn't talkative outside of DM mode, so it's hard to get a read on him, but I know he's stated that he prefers the way we roleplay when the offending player is absent.

One player outright quit rather than deal with problem case again, I'm not interested in looking into that individual's problem. (edit: That really gets more into laundry than I feel comfortable going.)

The other remaining player actually brought it up to me as an issue before I thought about addressing it as such.

[QuintonBeck]

If all your players are uncomfortable with that player and prefer to play without them don't force them to. Tell the problem player they're out and have a good game. I know it sounds harsh and might sting some, but a quick resolution of the problem is better than dragging it out and forcing more people to be uncomfortable. If you guys are friends still treat him normally outside the game but it sounds to me like you've got a problem player, a group that doesn't want him there, and the power to get him out. Better to have the majority happy and running a good game than make everyone suffer to accommodate someone who doesn't respect the game and the fellow players enough to act decent.

[GAThraawn]

You're asking how to structure your campaign to deal with a player deliberately sabotaging it. This is like asking how to construct a building to deal with somebody entering it and lining it with C4. It isn't going to work. RPGs require a social contract between all of the players to attempt something everybody can agree upon. This is why many groups, who legitimately want to play together, struggle and fall apart when players have differing expectations and desires. If one player is actively sabotaging, either through trying to destroy the campaign or simply by putting in no effort, it doesn't matter how you structure your sandcastle, he's still going to kick it down.

Now, people here can offer advice on how to punish him for his misdemeanours, taking the same aggressive and disrespectful tactics and turning them back on him, punishing and killing him whenever he steps out of line, but the only possible results of such tactics are browbeating him into submission where he does even less than he does now, or encouraging him to continue a war of escalation.

It's understandable to not want to evict someone from your group of friends, but roleplaying is an activity that everyone agrees to under some form of social contract. It's not unreasonable to tell your friend that he can't come to poker night if he keeps cheating and stealing the pot, or that he can't come to the waterpark if he doesn't know how to swim, or that he can't come with you to the library if he won't stop yelling out loud. It's not a rejection of him, it's an understanding of the fact that his behaviour in this setting is incompatible with the activity you're trying to undertake.

You need to sit down with him and explain this to him. It might be helpful to talk with the rest of the group first, saying something along the lines of "We all enjoy RPing, but I can't DM a good campaign if [Waldo] refuses to play, goes off the rails and sabotages the game. I'm not having fun playing with him, and so we need to come to a group decision. Do you guys enjoy playing with him? Because if you all do, maybe I can bow out and you can DM, but if you don't, we need to talk to him. He either needs to cooperate more so everyone can have fun, or he needs to stop playing with us."
Remember, evicting someone from your game group doesn't need to kick them out of your friend group. You can switch to playing every other week, and spend the other evening doing something you all enjoy.

Ultimately, however, a discussion like this should determine the difference between a friend and an acquaintance. If you actually like each other and want to spend time together, you should be able to compromise so that you can all hang out together. If you really just spend time because it's convenient, and he's more invested in stalking NPCs than in helping you to have fun, then perhaps it's not going to be a big loss.

So, sit him down, by yourself or with others of the group that feel the same way, and explain your position. Say that his behaviour (give specifics) makes it hard or impossible for you to run a campaign that you, and everyone else, enjoys. You don't need to give him an ultimatum or make it all about him, just calmly explain that the way he plays right now means that you can't have fun, and you can't run a campaign that everyone enjoys. It's not within your skill set. Then you can lay out the options that the two of you can pursue (again, no need to put him on the spot and make this about confrontation. You're not accusing him, just explaining the facts). He could leave the group, or he can change his play style.

[MonochromeTiger]

That answers one of my concerns by itself. I was thinking of it as a mixed problem both OOC and IC just due to how it bleeds into IC, putting it in the realm of OOC makes it easier.

Is it best to confront a longer term OOC issue like this outside of the normal play session? (like before or after play ends) I feel uncomfortable with the idea of hitting the "pause play" button to make an issue of this mid-session.

We have raised the subject with him in the past and it's usually quickly brushed past or justified with "I roleplay myself!"

"I roleplay myself" is all well and good if the person can avoid being disruptive or angering others but if they're going to smash multiple campaigns to play out what seems to be a stalker fantasy and not play with the rest of the group... what's the point in saying they're part of it?

Our usual DM isn't talkative outside of DM mode, so it's hard to get a read on him, but I know he's stated that he prefers the way we roleplay when the offending player is absent.

One player outright quit rather than deal with problem case again, I'm not interested in looking into that individual's problem. (edit: That really gets more into laundry than I feel comfortable going.)

The other remaining player actually brought it up to me as an issue before I thought about addressing it as such.

ok the fact that you've lost a DM and a player to this guy should be reason enough to consider kicking him out, he's bad enough to drive people out of the game and the group that's generally not a "talk it out" problem. talk to your other players, ask them if they really want to put up with this guy after all that he's put them through, if they say no kick him out.

[WbtE]

Our usual DM isn't talkative outside of DM mode, so it's hard to get a read on him, but I know he's stated that he prefers the way we roleplay when the offending player is absent.

One player outright quit rather than deal with problem case again, I'm not interested in looking into that individual's problem. (edit: That really gets more into laundry than I feel comfortable going.)

The other remaining player actually brought it up to me as an issue before I thought about addressing it as such.

My advice - all else being equal - is to talk to the player who quit and ask them if they would be interested in playing without your problem player. If you get a positive response, then politely but firmly tell the problem player that you don't enjoy playing with him and that he it out of your campaigns from now on. If you get anything like an apology and request for probation, say that you'll keep him in mind for the next game but don't buckle on this campaign.

If you aren't going to get the old pllayer back, you might be reluctant to shrink your group further. In that case, you could try advertising for new players, but I would still remove the problem player before taking this step - he's not a good advertisement for your group.

[Alent]

My advice - all else being equal - is to talk to the player who quit and ask them if they would be interested in playing without your problem player. If you get a positive response, then politely but firmly tell the problem player that you don't enjoy playing with him and that he it out of your campaigns from now on. If you get anything like an apology and request for probation, say that you'll keep him in mind for the next game but don't buckle on this campaign.

If you aren't going to get the old pllayer back, you might be reluctant to shrink your group further. In that case, you could try advertising for new players, but I would still remove the problem player before taking this step - he's not a good advertisement for your group.

I've felt like this is the direction things have been moving for a while, but I'm not the most socially capable person and am fearful of losing the entire group to a false step. (If that doesn't make any sense, I'm an aspie introvert that tends to fall on the social anxiety disorder side of the road.)

Getting the old player back is unlikely, but I'm not going to ask him to return unless the problem player is already gone. I'm not interested in accidentally ending up in a "If so and so leaves will you..." politics game with the players like that - it was bad enough as a raid officer.

The bad advertisement angle is also an inner concern. I have two prospects I am looking to invite who would be both first time players and new to the group. As much as I want their first experience to be good, I also don't want to cause a situation where it could be construed I kicked him to bring them in.

I do like the probation idea, tho'. I'll probably pull him aside beforehand and let him know I'm not going to deal with the usual shenanigans, and give him a chance to do better.

Thanks everyone, for the advice.

[Jay R]

A. Talk to everyone else first, to get advice (and support).

B. Tell him in advance that those tactics won't be allowed. Then stick to it.

C. If he chooses to leave the party, say, "OK. fine. I won't make five players wait on one, so you and I can run that adventure some other day, when the others aren't here. What do the rest of the party do now that he's gone?"

D. "I role-play myself" is no excuse for anti-social behavior. I'm so tempted to suggest that you give him the flip answer, "Well, nobody wants to play with your character. If that's just yourself, then nobody wants to play with you." But that would be rude. The correct response is, "I don't care why your characters have always been disruptive in the past. This one won't be, or you won't play."

But it doesn't matter what you say unless you stick to it. Make it clear that this is his final chance, and then make it his final chance.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Dealing with Problem (Players/GMs) 101

1. Talk to the person individually. Say (with an appropriate degree of tact) "I'm/the group is bothered by what you're doing. Could you please tone it down?"
2. If step 1 does not lead to a satisfactory resolution, kick the player/leave the group.

Gaming. Simple stuff.

[valadil]

• ... consistently provokes arguments to interrupt roleplay.
• ... consistently brings the same Tabula Rasa Sociopathic RP persona to the table.
• ... deliberately splits off of the party as soon as we get to town.

1. No long arguments at the table. Arguments that can't be solved in 60 seconds can be dealt with outside of game time. 90% of the time, the argument will be forgotten anyway.

2. A lot of players do that for a lot of reasons. Personally I see it as a roleplaying maturity thing. Encourage the player where you can. Be patient everywhere else.

For my own RP, if I'm having trouble playing a character and need a crutch, I'll sometimes pick a character from a TV show to emulate. I won't rip off the character wholesale, but I'll take an aspect of the character's personality and try to channel that. i.e. I wouldn't play a high school chemistry teacher who turns to dealing meth to pay for his cancer treatments, but I might borrow Walter White's ability to bludgeon everyone around him with cold logic until they do what he wants.

Combine that with traits for 2 or 3 other characters and I've got something that's easy to play, but still looks creative.

3. I'd handle this one OOC. Tell him you don't have the resources to split the party. If it's really important that his character leave the group, that character can become an NPC and he'll have to play something else. It's his responsibility to play a character that wants to stick with the party.

[Frenth Alunril]

Hand him an NG cleric, take away his Devine powers when he steps out of line, when he splits off from the party, abduct him with bad guys who demand ransom.

Be sure you make his character for him, and tell him straight up, "tank this game and you are gone, I'm reserving that right, right now. Refuse to follow the rules, or argue too much, and yer done, got it?"

Smile and say, "it's role play, I think you are good enough to play a cleric, if not, well, the challenge will be good. Let's have fun."

[dps]

Is it best to confront a longer term OOC issue like this outside of the normal play session? (like before or after play ends) I feel uncomfortable with the idea of hitting the "pause play" button to make an issue of this mid-session.

We have raised the subject with him in the past and it's usually quickly brushed past or justified with "I roleplay myself!"

First of all, yes, it's almost always better to confront OOC problems outside of the normal play session.

Second, if you've already raised the subject with him and it hasn't helped, it's time to boot him.

I kind of hate to suggest this, but if you're not comfortable with actually kicking him out, don't tell him you're kicking him out, just don't bother to tell him when and where game sessions are being held.

[NikitaDarkstar]

Honestly, it sounds like he's actually not interested in playing the actual game. Is it possible he got dragged into it because a friend/girlfriend/brother/sister/green alien from Mars more or less forced him to and he's stuck because he wants to hang out, but doesn't actually enjoy playing? Or at least doesn't enjoy the type of games you guys have been running?

Either way you will have to talk to him. Find out what's going on, if you can work with him, work with him, if you can't, well unfortunately you will most likely need to ask him to leave then. I doubt he's being an ass, and have been being an ass for this long without there being some underlying reason for it. I'm not saying that makes it okay, but talking to him away from the table, and actually having a proper, civil, conversation about it may help. At the very least it will give you a halfway decent chance of parting on friendly terms if it does turn out that he, you and the rest of the group aren't compatible.

[Jlerpy]

"I roleplay myself" is a terrible contradiction. All I can picture is "reality" shows where it's set up to supposedly look like you're just watching people be how they are, but it's carefully edited and staged to enhance the drama, or something.
And that's still better than what sounds like the real implication: he's actually just a jerk.

[jedipotter]

The same player...

• ... consistently provokes arguments to interrupt roleplay.
• ... consistently brings the same Tabula Rasa Sociopathic RP persona to the table.
• ... deliberately splits off of the party as soon as we get to town.

Any suggestions for RP training an argumentative unRPer?

If you ''must'' play with him:

1. Don't argue. If he tries, ignore him. If he starts with another player, break it up. It is good to have a rule like During the game a player may not at any time or for any reason question a rule, action or any other event in the game. Anything of that nature can only be asked after the game.

2. Don't know what that is, but you can ignore that too.

3. You can always avoid towns. But if you need too you can just do the old ''put baby in the corner''. It is simple, group get to town and he runs off by himself. Guess what you do: ignore him. Set him up with his ''I follow the guy with the cloak'', and let him be. Keep him in real time with the group, so if the group is talking to the mayor, he is only following the guy for that long(couple minutes).

For even more fun, try a rule like This is a group game. Any player that wishes to have their character leave the group for any reason, is agreeing not to play for the duration until they have their character rejoin the group.

And for evil fun Have the group get goodys. Awesome stuff that he would like. ''The local Psycho Guild gives each of you a dagger made from your own blood that only you can use that can 'vampric touch' three times a day and.... . Then what him be sad as he missed the stuff as he wandered off. Muuuhahaha.

[Jlerpy]

If you ''must'' play with him:

1. Don't argue. If he tries, ignore him. If he starts with another player, break it up. It is good to have a rule like During the game a player may not at any time or for any reason question a rule, action or any other event in the game. Anything of that nature can only be asked after the game.

2. Don't know what that is, but you can ignore that too.

3. You can always avoid towns. But if you need too you can just do the old ''put baby in the corner''. It is simple, group get to town and he runs off by himself. Guess what you do: ignore him. Set him up with his ''I follow the guy with the cloak'', and let him be. Keep him in real time with the group, so if the group is talking to the mayor, he is only following the guy for that long(couple minutes).

For even more fun, try a rule like This is a group game. Any player that wishes to have their character leave the group for any reason, is agreeing not to play for the duration until they have their character rejoin the group.

And for evil fun Have the group get goodys. Awesome stuff that he would like. ''The local Psycho Guild gives each of you a dagger made from your own blood that only you can use that can 'vampric touch' three times a day and.... . Then what him be sad as he missed the stuff as he wandered off. Muuuhahaha.

That all sounds very heavy-handed and passive-aggressive. :(

[Alent]

2. Don't know what that is, but you can ignore that too.

Tabula rasa means "Blank slate". No background, no personality, no hobbies, no likes, no dislikes, just a literal blank slate.

And for evil fun Have the group get goodys. Awesome stuff that he would like. ''The local Psycho Guild gives each of you a dagger made from your own blood that only you can use that can 'vampric touch' three times a day and.... . Then what him be sad as he missed the stuff as he wandered off. Muuuhahaha.

I can't see this helping anything. I'm trying to get away from passive aggressive behavior, not weaponize it and make a cold war of it.

[MonochromeTiger]

I can't see this helping anything. I'm trying to get away from passive aggressive behavior, not weaponize it and make a cold war of it.

but what if they feel too warm? a cold war could cool them down and make them comfy. don't they deserve to be comfy like a polar bear?

[Jlerpy]

but what if they feel too warm? a cold war could cool them down and make them comfy. don't they deserve to be comfy like a polar bear?

I can't tell if you've entirely missed the point or are trying to make a joke.
?

[MonochromeTiger]

I can't tell if you've entirely missed the point or are trying to make a joke.
?

figures, I get called out only a few hours earlier for using sarcasm for a joke without blue text and now it's not noticed when I use it :P. basically I agree that jedipotter's solution does indeed seem overly hostile, I feel that if the behavior is as bad as we're being told it deserves a clear "get better or get out" but it seems a bit childish to make the person suffer till they leave on their own rather than own up to wanting them gone.

for those that don't get the terrible joke inspired by wife: cold war, cold temperature, polar bears survive in cold environments....the joke was bad but can I at least go a few minutes without being called on it one of these times?

[Jlerpy]

figures, I get called out only a few hours earlier for using sarcasm for a joke without blue text and now it's not noticed when I use it :P. basically I agree that jedipotter's solution does indeed seem overly hostile, I feel that if the behavior is as bad as we're being told it deserves a clear "get better or get out" but it seems a bit childish to make the person suffer till they leave on their own rather than own up to wanting them gone.

for those that don't get the terrible joke inspired by wife: cold war, cold temperature, polar bears survive in cold environments....the joke was bad but can I at least go a few minutes without being called on it one of these times?

Yeah, I'd just forgot about the blue text thing, as I don't check in that often. Sorry.

[MonochromeTiger]

Yeah, I'd just forgot about the blue text thing, as I don't check in that often. Sorry.

eh, if I really want to stop getting confused comments I'd improve my humor.

[jedipotter]

I can't see this helping anything. I'm trying to get away from passive aggressive behavior, not weaponize it and make a cold war of it.

It works great, even if your a sunshine and rainbows kind of person. You simply want to make it so he does not want to leave the group. And greed is one of the most powerful ways to do that. Ask someone to stand on a corner ''for the good of all mankind'' and they might do it. Ask someone to stand on a corner for a chance to win a lot of money, and chances are they will stand there.

It does not need to be a 'weapon' (but trust me that would drive him crazy). It can be anything.

[TriForce]

about the long arguements: you are DM, in case of a disagreement, you can simply decide one way or another, ending the discussion entirely. important things to remember however is to be consistant and fair when doing this.

playing the same character is annoying, but not a disaster. since he seems to be worried about other people stealing the spotlight, advise him to make a deeper character then normal, so you have something to work with (for example, if he had a problem with a thieves guild in his background, let him encounter thieves that belong to that guild somewhere in the campaign, could be great fun, great roleplay, and if nothing else, a good excuse for a random encounter) again, be fair about this, dont give the player special treatment one way or another, and if other players also have deep backgrounds, use that too

seperating from the group doesnt HAVE to be a problem (and with a little luck, the 2nd point i made could lessen it) but if he does, ask him why his character want to go alone. if he gives a good reason, roleplay it with him, but try to keep it short. if he doesnt, say "ok, then ill focus on the group, you will rejoin them after x time"

[Kalmageddon]

"How do you remove a cancer without removing the cancer?"

You can't, sorry.
You either deal with this guy, who clearly has had years to change his behaviour and didn't, or you just leave him out of your roleplaying game sessions.

[A_Man]

Boot him. We've had this problem in one of our pbp games, and we just booted the offender. Of course, it's harder to do so in a IRL campaign setting, but it's nevcesary.

[The Oni]

It sounds to me like you're playing with a real life Belkar, and given the choice to Evolve or Die, he continues to choose Die. Barring the sudden transformation of your campaign into one that involves assassination missions (at the risk of rewarding bad behavior) you really need to talk to him because he's not going to make an effort to fit into your campaign otherwise.

[Scow2]

"How do you remove a cancer without removing the cancer?"

You can't, sorry.
You either deal with this guy, who clearly has had years to change his behaviour and didn't, or you just leave him out of your roleplaying game sessions.

It's more like "How do I remove a malignant tumor without removing the whole organ it's attached to." It's easy to become jaded/dismissive of people through the anonymity and "plenty of fish in the sea" mentality fostered over the internet. The problem is "How much is lost to the cancer."

As it's described, it's a real game with a real friend who happens to not be into the game.

As for him going off on his own in towns - let him, but give him no more focus than the other members of the group, who should get a lot more mileage out of their time because they can interact with each other when it's not actually their 'turn'/session of time: If it's a group of 5, they get 40 minutes for every 10 minutes he gets.