Can there be gaming groups without a problem player?

[Amaril]

So we all know how tragically common it is that in a gaming group, there's the one player who just doesn't get along with everybody else, or the one who just gets on everyone's nerves. I've definitely had the experience my share of times. Recently, though, I started rolling with a new group, and from what I can tell so far, everyone is getting along great. We're not all into the exact same stuff, of course, but in general our playstyles all seem quite compatible, and there hasn't been any personal tension I've observed.

My question is, is this one of those things where there's a problem player in every group, and if you can't tell who it is, it's probably you? Or could I really have just found a group where everyone gets along? I'd hate to think I've been making things hard on everybody without realizing it, but I'd never claim I don't have my share of annoying habits. Anyone have any advice?

[Friv]

...

I, uh... okay, first to answer your question, yes, of course. There can be gaming groups with no problem players. I've played in several of them. I've run for several of them. I would go so far as to say that a strong majority of the groups that I've run for have not had a problem player (and I'm defining this fairly generously, to include a couple people that I enjoy gaming with, but who have problems that make them not always easy to deal with).

Problem players are not a guarantee. Not nearly a guarantee, in fact.

And secondly, why would you believe that problem players are a necessity? That kind of sounds like you have had terrible gaming luck before this.

[Amaril]

...

I, uh... okay, first to answer your question, yes, of course. There can be gaming groups with no problem players. I've played in several of them. I've run for several of them. I would go so far as to say that a strong majority of the groups that I've run for have not had a problem player (and I'm defining this fairly generously, to include a couple people that I enjoy gaming with, but who have problems that make them not always easy to deal with).

Problem players are not a guarantee. Not nearly a guarantee, in fact.

And secondly, why would you believe that problem players are a necessity? That kind of sounds like you have had terrible gaming luck before this.

I guess I kind of have, now I think about it. I mean, I haven't actually been gaming for that long, at least compared to a lot of the community. I've been in four steady groups before this one, and all of them had at least one player who caused some issues.

Also, I've just been kind of down on myself lately due to non-game-related stuff, and that's probably made me disposed to wonder whether I'm an unknowingly unpleasant gamer regardless of what's actually been going on. I won't burden you with details. Thanks for the reassurance, anyway.

[Darth Ultron]

Problem players are not that common. They are really only about as common as jerks are in real life. Though, of course, if you go in some ''social circles'' you will encounter more jerks then average and the same is true for problem players.

I lot of the groups I game with have no problem players. But it's not be chance, we weed them out. If you don't fit in your gone. So it's possible to have an all good players game.

[BayardSPSR]

Short answer: yes.

The fact that you don't have any problem players in your group doesn't mean that you're a problem player. If anything, if you're not experiencing problems with another person, it's unlikely that they're experiencing problems with you, since being a "problem" player is usually a mismatch between gaming/social styles of different people. Problematic relationships tend to be problematic on both sides.

If there's no personal tension, and everyone has compatible playstyles... You're good. Enjoy it. Stop worrying about how everything's going well. The fact that you don't have a problem doesn't mean you have a problem.

[Winter_Wolf]

Yeah, problem players aren't the norm at all, but people mostly post horror stories. Everything's awesome rarely gets talked about because we don't need to vent about good stuff.

[nedz]

I play with two groups which contain no problem players. Players with a range of play-styles yes, problems no.

I guess this is fairly common, but you just don't hear about them because every things fine does not make for an interesting story.

Now I have seen problems in the past - mainly in LARP: but we did have about 70 players in the group.

[OldTrees1]

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. It is the default case for a group not to have problem players.

That said, it is easier to identify someone else being a problem player than to identify if you are being a problem player. You probably are not a problem player, but checking yourself is a great way to practice empathy (a really great skill, I cannot recommend leveling it enough ).

[Esprit15]

Of the two IRL groups I am in, one has no problem plays (barring a single pvp kill due to some tensions at the time), and the other had a problem player who mellowed out with time. Biggest thing is communication. Either the player will correct their behavior, or leave.

[goto124]

If I were to answer the question directly I would say "yes, the GM can be the problem". I've been That Railroady GM before, so.

But to answer what the OP is actually asking, happy gaming groups don't make compelling news, so we hear mostly the horror stories.

[cobaltstarfire]

I think it's possible, probably even more often than not.

Though I understand worrying, it can be a pretty vicious cycle (like I worry a lot that I'm a problem player, and then that kind of feeds into itself as I neurotically try not to be problematic but at the same time cause problems because I don't want to cause problems). It's a hard mental habit to break out of, but catching yourself and realizing that you probably aren't a problem player, and everything is working out fine will eventually get you to where you aren't stuck worrying excessively.

[Amaril]

If I were to answer the question directly I would say "yes, the GM can be the problem". I've been That Railroady GM before, so.

But to answer what the OP is actually asking, happy gaming groups don't make compelling news, so we hear mostly the horror stories.

Ooh, yeah, I've definitely been that guy

And fair enough, I can understand the reporting bias. Pretty sure I'm worrying over nothing.

[Cluedrew]

To goto124: To be fair, there are other kinds of problem GM's.

Although there are actually terrible human beings who will always be bad players, in most cases the mismatching expectations and bad communications theory seems to hold.

[neonchameleon]

1: Yes.

2: I'm not sure where my main group counts when I DM. I've got two awesome roleplayers in it - but they like very different types of game and I can't pitch a highly tactical game that's also off the wall improvisation at the same time. Running for either of them I can pitch spot on, but running for both is a problem for me to the point I try and have one of them DM (they are both great DMs as well and always run their style of game whereas I can run either). So even as a good group it's not without problems.
p
3: But once again yes. It's just people talk about problems

[goto124]

it can be a pretty vicious cycle (like I worry a lot that I'm a problem player, and then that kind of feeds into itself as I neurotically try not to be problematic but at the same time cause problems because I don't want to cause problems).

Hey, it happens!

I myself, personally, often can't quite seem to find the good medium between "boringly meh" and "disruptive", as if those are the only options that exist. Then again, I've reacted rather badly to game elements (e.g. conflict) that make the game interesting in the first place... I should find a way to stop getting so personal in games without detaching myself so much I just lose interest altogether. Doesn't help that the only kind of conflict I can handle is combat - anything involving social skills freaks me out so much I can't enjoy the game anymore. I can't count the number of times I got myself into social conflict, and when I try to pull myself out of it I end up digging deeper till it's too late to do anything about. Cue failed interaction.

[Pex]

"That guy". Oh, I hate "That Guy". Worse when I was in a group full of "That Guy". I couldn't take it anymore and left the group. Fortunately for me and players in general, not every group has a "That Guy". It's in Poker or similar where if you don't know who the mark is, it's you. If other players are not butting heads with each other and no one is with you there is no "That Guy", and you're not one either. Treasure those groups.

It was a long and hard lesson for me to learn I do not have to put up with "That Guy". I still fondly remember 15 years later when a "That Guy", a "That Girl" actually, had briefly joined my old group. By that time I had learned I did not have to accept the behavior. I was a newbie player of that group myself just two sessions prior. I bonded well in and out of character with the party she had no room to disrupt things and left the group after her second session. It was sweet, sweet victory. That group lasted 12 glorious years.

[GrayDeath]

In short: yes, as has been said. I had a group like that for close to 8 years (and it had quoite some fluctuation around the 3 core members).....

but


...then a newly introduced Player managed to break it within 8 Months.


So yeah, we`ve all been there, and some times bad luck happens (more often in this decade, me thinks, than in the last^^ but maybe I`m jsut old...), dont let it ruin the game(s) for you!

[Chauncymancer]

In my experience, problem players are detectable. There comes a level of experience and self knowledge where the party members can figure out a problem exists before play actually begins, and defuse it. Thus, beyond a certain poInt I'd expect every group to stop experiencing that.

[Knaight]

You can easily have a group without a problem player, and you can also have a group with more then one. There's also always the possibility for situational problem players which only crop up if you have a particular combination of people in a group, and in my experience this is more common than just straightforward problem players.

[ApocalypseSquid]

In over 10 years of RPG's, both D/GMing and playing, I have had a total of 3 problem players in my groups -- one of whom was in a one-shot, and another of whom was my brother (who later admitted he was playing that way just to annoy me-- he's gotten better since then). Given that I've played with probably over 50 people, it seems clear to me that problem players are the exception, not the rule.

[Lorsa]

I'm going to be contrary and say

NO.


Then I will add in some caveats and discussion.

In my experience, all groups above basically 2-3 people work by there being at least one person in the group whom is the target of most feelings of annoyance or irritation from the other people. There's this one guy/gal that doesn't quite fit in for some reason.

However, an interesting thing is, after removal of this one person, all those feelings of annoyance and irritation will switch to someone else. So now someone who was not "the problem person" before will suddenly become "the problem person". I think there's some basic psychology there, and the effect is enhanced online (such as in a World of Warcraft guild). I can imagine two effects that could explain the phenomena, either the second person's faults were hidden beneath the larger faults of the first problem person, so people didn't really notice them until the first one was gone, or people just have this weird habit of projecting all their irritation onto one source, because it is more convenient.

I think the critical mass for this behavior is around 2-3 people. Once it becomes four, one of them will become "the target".

The way to get away from this problem, is of course to realize that, in fact everyone is the problem person. You do things that annoy me, I do things that annoy you, and we both do things that annoys Pete. It's just the nature of things. Rather than trying to focus your feelings on one person (probably hoping that once they are gone, everything will be better), you spread them out on everyone, acknowledging that no groups are perfect. You can never have a smooth, irritation-free group that you dream about.

As long as everyone in the group respects each other and has constructive conversations about their respective feelings, you can get a no-problem group.

So, I claim that the no-problem gaming group is not the one without a problem player, but rather the one where everyone is the problem player.

[OldTrees1]

I'm going to be contrary and say

NO.

The way to get away from this problem, is of course to realize that, in fact everyone is the problem person. You do things that annoy me, I do things that annoy you, and we both do things that annoys Pete. It's just the nature of things. Rather than trying to focus your feelings on one person (probably hoping that once they are gone, everything will be better), you spread them out on everyone, acknowledging that no groups are perfect. You can never have a smooth, irritation-free group that you dream about.

As long as everyone in the group respects each other and has constructive conversations about their respective feelings, you can get a no-problem group.

So, I claim that the no-problem gaming group is not the one without a problem player, but rather the one where everyone is the problem player.

Usually I have seen the term "Problem Player" refer to an annoyance(or even harm) that is beyond a certain group dependent threshold. No group is perfect but the existence of minor enough annoyances is not enough for it to be classified "Problem Player" by the common usage of that term.

That said, your solution of respect & communication is a good way to make sure the annoyances never get close to that threshold.

PS: Everyone annoying everyone else is not the complete picture of the nature of things. It ignores both what annoys someone is subjective(and thus it is not universally the case that everyone is annoying to everyone else) and that people have thresholds before something becomes an annoyance(lots of fingernails on chalkboards would be mildly annoying to me but infrequent enough and it would not even register much less be an annoyance).

[Pex]

Perhaps it would help to define "problem player". Lorsa appears to indicate meaning a person's real life habit, quirk, or personality trait. That's not how I view the issue. I view it as a playstyle. The "Jerk". He's the player when given absolute need to know information the party needs never tells the party. He's the player who constantly exchanges private notes with the DM for his own mini-game of whatever. Could be nothing. Could be lone wolf adventuring enriching himself. He is smug in his own superiority and scoffs and tsks when something bad happens to another player's character because obviously that player was being stupid. If he finds a magic item on his own even though it's clearly party treasure or not useful to him but very useful to someone else will keep it.

[Amaril]

Perhaps it would help to define "problem player". Lorsa appears to indicate meaning a person's real life habit, quirk, or personality trait. That's not how I view the issue. I view it as a playstyle. The "Jerk". He's the player when given absolute need to know information the party needs never tells the party. He's the player who constantly exchanges private notes with the DM for his own mini-game of whatever. Could be nothing. Could be lone wolf adventuring enriching himself. He is smug in his own superiority and scoffs and tsks when something bad happens to another player's character because obviously that player was being stupid. If he finds a magic item on his own even though it's clearly party treasure or not useful to him but very useful to someone else will keep it.

I do agree that being a problem player, as I see it, is more about one's game behavior than one's real-life behavior, but I think this is just one of many ways to do it. Another that comes to mind for me is the player who refuses to engage with the game world beyond mindless murderhoboing, even when it's clear that's what the rest of the group wants out of the game. The kind of player who, while the rest of the group is negotiating with a quest-giver, will wander off and try to burn down a building for no explicable reason, getting everyone else into trouble, just because they enjoy being disruptive. That's just one possibility that comes to mind.

[Piedmon_Sama]

I hate to be a cynic (e: no I don't!) but yes there's always going to be a "that guy" in a gaming group, just like there's always going to be a "that guy" in every group of friends. A guy who's on the bottom pecking order, who's the outsider even if your group are officially The Outsiders. We'd all like to believe we're beyond that kind of wolf-pack pecking order mentality but nah. Humans are just naturally hierarchical. In every social group you have your types like your guy who constantly wisecracks and pushes the boundaries of what the group will tolerate (classic example: the guy in the gaming group who always makes joke characters with names like Don Francisco Humpsalot or Buttpatt Judas) the guy who's just along for the ride and makes a bland character and never contributes anything but rolls in combat, the guy who tends to naturally take charge and set the agenda, and the guy who frankly is there because either because you feel bad for him or because it's just not worth the drama to tell him to go away. I've DM'd for all those guys. I think I've been all those guys except hopefully not the last one. It's not as simple as you have a type and that's just you, although people have tendencies: I've been in groups where I took charge and I've been in groups where I just sat back and doodled in my sketchbook and basically checked out. Or different sessions of the same group, depending on who all was there.

Basically problem players have always been part of the game and they always will. But there's degrees! There are some things that should be absolutely not tolerated, but sometimes you do have to give a little and let the wiseguy play Buttpatt Judas and do his silly things to keep the game running. Likewise don't try to prod the quiet guy into roleplaying more actively if he doesn't want to, don't tell the planner to shut up, and so on. This idea that you can have your perfect group playing your perfect game is kinda poisonous IMO and leads to a lot of armchair roleplayers who spend more time pontificating the game on the internet than actually playing it.

[Winter_Wolf]

The thing about problem players is that sometimes they're just all around sucky people and the gaming problem is just an extension of that. If you invite relative strangers to the group it's more likely to happen, but presumably if you're gaming with friends you'll know beforehand about general craptastic personality issues (and then the question is why would you invite them to the table?).

For me the definition of "problem player" is someone who desperately needs a boot in the [booop]. There's really surprisingly a lot less of this kind of person than I'd previously thought. Speaking as someone who has become less tolerant of putting up with undesirable stuff the older I get. Then again, the ones who deserve it, Really deserve it.

[cobaltstarfire]

Problem players don't necessarily have to be on the bottom of whatever social power dynamic has formed, it's hard to even imagine someone on the "bottom" causing problems be of the lack of power that would come with being on the bottom.

Problem players are simply disruptive, for whatever reason, it could be simple incompatibility between people, bad personality traits, bad manners, or a mismatch in play style.

I hate to be a cynic (e: no I don't!) but yes there's always going to be a "that guy" in a gaming group, just like there's always going to be a "that guy" in every group of friends. A guy who's on the bottom pecking order, who's the outsider even if your group are officially The Outsiders. We'd all like to believe we're beyond that kind of wolf-pack pecking order mentality but nah. Humans are just naturally hierarchical.

Real wolf packs don't have a hierarchy structure at all other than Mom and Dad are boss. The sooner the incorrect idea of wolf packs having alpha and omegas or a social hierarchy based on dominance dies the better.

[Cluedrew]

On wolf packs: "We would like to believe we have surpassed the wolf pack mentality, but in truth we haven't even reached it yet."

On problem players: A player who, in the context of a particular game, campaign or group is the source of the majority of the problems in that context. Some ill defined threshold on the number*significance of the problems have to be passed as well.

How or why they cause problems are still significant, but that just defines the type of problem player and what can be done about it.

[Piedmon_Sama]

Real wolf packs don't have a hierarchy structure at all other than Mom and Dad are boss. The sooner the incorrect idea of wolf packs having alpha and omegas or a social hierarchy based on dominance dies the better.

It's just a metaphor. Wolves may not have a complex social hierarchy but humans do.

[Lorsa]

Perhaps it would help to define "problem player". Lorsa appears to indicate meaning a person's real life habit, quirk, or personality trait. That's not how I view the issue. I view it as a playstyle. The "Jerk". He's the player when given absolute need to know information the party needs never tells the party. He's the player who constantly exchanges private notes with the DM for his own mini-game of whatever. Could be nothing. Could be lone wolf adventuring enriching himself. He is smug in his own superiority and scoffs and tsks when something bad happens to another player's character because obviously that player was being stupid. If he finds a magic item on his own even though it's clearly party treasure or not useful to him but very useful to someone else will keep it.

Then yes, there can be groups without problem players, because those kind of players should get kicked out.

Still, when you do, all the other "normal players" will start to irritate you more than they did before.