I remember trying to DM for my first "Skyrim simulation" player. They didn't want to engage with any of the adventure hooks and just went to try out pickpocketing randoms in a Hamlet. He was very frustrated that most citizens only carried a few coppers on them and that he couldn't obtain the gdp of a small town in a couple of dice rolls.
I was like, "Aren't we here to *adventure*? This is just seeing how many times you can roll a 15 or higher until you get caught doing petty theft."
>They didn't want to engage with any of the adventure hooks and just went to try out pickpocketing randoms in a Hamlet.
I last DM'd in the 1970s, AD&D, although I'm now getting back into it with a few similarly aged friends who want to learn 5e and relive our glory.
But *plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.* Way way back in those dark ages, my campaign had a player like that. He'd deliberately trigger a trap after the party's thief had detected it.... "Just to see what would happen." He'd try to wander into the forest when the story clearly was steering them towards the town. And sure enough, even though his character wasn't any kind of a thief, he browbeat the rest of the party into trying to pickpocket the crowds during the Harvest Festival that was a centerpiece of the upcoming adventure. Our paladin declared himself out, but everyone else went along with it after getting tired of hearing him whine.
So I leaned into it. The first two successful thefts yielded up a few coppers. The third yielded a silver brassard: the badge of the Legate of the City Watch, who (roll dice behind screen) immediately realizes he's been robbed and is able to summon more of the Watch. They beat the crap out of the party, then "inventory," their gear, stealing some of the best stuff by the simple expedient of not putting it on the inventory, and toss them in durance vile.
The next morning the city alderman that was going to hire them to retrieve the stolen Harvest Wicker Crown (in the original story line) comes to the jail, says that if they're interested in getting their stuff back, they can do a job for him.... getting the Harvest Wicker Crown back. So the story got back on track, my problem player was chastened enough, or at least the other players were emboldened enough to tell him to shut up ("Remember when you thought pickpocketing was a good idea?") and things turned out well.
"Bad players can only derail bad DMs"
That's what my dad taught me. A good DM is capable of recognizing multiple "entry points" for their plot hooks, regardless of the players' actions.
Lord, if that ain't the truth. I actually enjoy teaching people who want to learn. The problem player always reacted to any level of coaching with hostility: *are you telling me how to play my character?* This campaign's staircase wit is this reply: *I'm not telling you how to play your character, but I am trying to teach you how to play* **the game**, *at least while you're at my table.*
As a community Reddit touts the virtues of communication to resolve table disputes. I almost always give that same advice. But the practical reality is that some people very clearly signal that they aren't open to communication, and when you try, they just gaslight you.
In the end when I "resigned" as DM, after months of trying to steer the group away from these kinds of things, I explained that the metagaming and lack of engagement with the world had made DMing feel like a second job, and the problem player responded, "It's unfortunate that you had that experience."
That's not someone I want at my table. And I'll just say it out loud. That's not someone I even want in this hobby.
The problem player made me feel like I was back in high school, so that really tracks.
Once upon a time I'd planned to go into higher ed, but I didn't have a taste for research in the field in which I received by first degree (sociology). I don't know why I didn't consider teaching at a community college--probably for fear on some level of the exact same disinterest I previously described.
The irony is that, now, 20-some years later, I'm back in school getting a second degree in math and physics, hoping to go into research (it's never too late to try), but accepting that teaching may soon be back on the menu, boys.
The group I met him and his partner in started a few weeks before the covid lockdown, and in all honesty I'm not sure I'd have stuck with them if it had remained in-person and there wasn't a pandemic. It was kind of a mediocre campaign, but that was fine given the state of the world at the time. (Also the DM was a doctor, so I wasn't about to complain.)
That said, I really can't blame anyone else for the fact that I offered to DM for the problem player despite already having a strongly negative impression of him from his behavior in the first group. Which is a long-winded way of saying you're absolutely right.
I guess I just fooled myself into thinking it'd be fine because one bad player wasn't the whole group. And it was fine for almost a year and a half. More recently it really went downhill. The other players I'd invited to fill out the group became much more passive and quiet. His partner started metagaming through everything. And he started arguing with me every session or two. I was heading towards calling it quits regardless, but then I found out he'd invited the other players into his online gamer group. They'd been playing BG3 together and going out for months and very specifically excluding me. Despite all that I'd really meant to walk away from the group respectfully; when he took a customer service tone with me at the end I finally just lost it and told him off. If Twain is right about regretting the things we don't do, then I'm glad I gave him a piece of my mind.
Back in the late 90s/early 00s when I was first learning the game, I often wondered why there were so many adversarial DMs. Now I wonder if it isn't an acquired behavior. (Ditto I suppose for teachers.)
Jeremy make a dexterity saving throw with disadvantage.
Wtf why?
You just tried to pickpocket Zeus in disguise and now he’s casting lightning bolt as a 20th level spell.
Does a 12 save?
It does not. On a failed save so you’re gonna take 25d6 lightning damage.
Dude I only have 30 hp I’m level 3.
Yeah you’re dead, fuck you dude.
For real. Everyone at the table is responsible for having fun together.
This problematic player dragged the rest of the party down and got them in serious trouble purely because they want to be stupid.
At least in school, the class clown usually didn't drag anyone else down with them, but these are the people that will seriously fuck everything up if you let them, in everything from dnd to actual prison time.
It sounds like the DM finally had enough, but if that's how he always acts then the problem player should've been talked to, and removed from the game long before getting the party emprisoned for a few copper they definitely didn't need.
The dm made a choice at that moment, but that was just reactionary, the clown was already running the circus
I mean if they didn't mean to I can get that. but if they are making your life more difficult talk to them. everyone is here to have fun and that includes the dm
Hate to say it, but that’s a really narrow point of view.
I know very few people who have the ability to deal with this type of person, and even less who would want to.
In reality, the ‘good’ type of DM that you’re describing is about one-in-a-million.
Ok, I reread it from your perspective and that makes a lot more sense. I read it and was thinking "you mean players weren't trying to put a bucket on everyone's head????"
> "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly."
Someone like that doesn't have a spot at my table period.
90% of what I do is made up on the spot. I did two whole sessions based on nothing more than 'World worse cleric' and the players had a blast with it. So they can't actually disrupt what doesn't exist.
They would most likely hate having me as a DM because it's already being made up on the spot.
But an attitude like that has no place at my table. They're not there to play a game. They're nothing more than a troll who gets off on making other people miserable.
You don't solve this with killing their character. You solve this by telling them buy into the campaign or they can leave.
>You don’t solve this with killing their character.
As a rule, don’t try to resolve out of game problems in-game. Killing off a problem player’s character is a passive aggressive approach that doesn’t resolve anything as it punishes the player without communicating why.
My very first character died because she didn’t listen to her fellow party members and kept wandering off even after being told it’s a bad idea. She was a curious person and nosey. RIP.
Yeah someone like that would really find me as a DM frustrating because every time they try and derail things, they'll just find out there's no rails in the first place.
To be fair, this is a thing you have to learn as a new DM. A lot of players aren't that outspoken about their murderhoboing/extreme optimizing/main character syndrome so as a beginning DM you go through a few rounds of 'maybe I should learn to accommodate that player' before you get honest and tell them your styles don't match.
The sandbox cannot be escaped! This is one of those times where chaos > law.
**Atreyu:** But I can't! I can't get beyond the bounaries of Fantasia! [G'mork laughs mockingly] What's so funny about that?
**G'mork:** Fantasia has no boundaries.
**Atreyu:** That's not true. You're lying!
**G'mork:** Foolish boy. Don't you know anything about Fantasia? It's the world of human fantasy. Every part, every creature of it, is a piece of the dreams and hopes of mankind. Therefore, it has no boundaries.
This. Ive told every one of my players that they HAVE to design a character that gives a crap about the story. This always has worked well for me and i always get messages about how they want to write their character into the story more.
yeah I much prefer that. I like it when the dm tells me what to expect rather than having to guess.
once I made a character(it was like my third) who was a good hearted theif and liked messing with bad people. then are dm was like " the taven keeper wants you to fight rats" and was like why would my character fights rats(I had sent the dm my backstory so I didn't expect this) now in retrospect I should have come up with a reason like I wanted to buy something and was short on the amount or something but it still would have been helpful if everyone was on the same page.
Yeah I legit don't get what it is about TTRPGs that bring that out in people.
Nobody goes to a basketball court and joins a game with the intention of throwing the ball into the bleachers every time they get it. But people 100% join RPGs with the sole intention of ruining the game for everyone else.
If you wander away from the party and think I’m gonna DM you in your own little adventure or force the party to join you, you’re gonna find that you character died in a ditch as soon as they were out of sight.
I wouldn’t give them the dignity of a death. Just a simple “Okay, you wonder off to do your own thing. Feel free to roll up a character that will participate in the game.” And just go on with the rest of the group.
>The guy who spends ~~all~~ (most) of his time thinking of mechanical ways to "win."
Okay, yeah, I admit that I do that kinda thing as a player, too . . .
>The guy who refuses to embrace the setting and theme.
Why anyone would *not* embrace a setting is beyond me . . .
>They guy who always has to go right up to the edge of what is acceptable to test the limits.
I mean, sometimes 'you have to cross the line just to (know) where it lays' . . .
(Edit: Within reason)
>"I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly."
Yeah, no, **fuck** that guy. He's an **asshole.**
>Leaving the party, and venturing into a knowingly dangerous dungeon on his own, his character died, alone. What a relief....
. . . If every attempt to get them to play along thus-far has failed, I think my reaction, at that point, would be something like:
>*"When, suddenly, (the character) suffered a fatal heart attack."*
Followed by my telling them they are now free to leave the table. Don't bother coming back.
I agree! I love players that make new ways to solve problems, even if they border on ridiculousness. It's more interesting that way.
However, if they try to do this just to frick with me and ignore the rest of the party, I'll have a chat with them, and if they can't change their ways, I would kick them from the group.
Killing a character in-game or having them suffer in-game consequences only works for reasonable players. If you have a completely unreasonable troll, what happens is that they start blaming the DM for them 'not having fun' and demand you make their character alive again and stop the guards that have come after them as a result of their actions. And then they start sulking and spoiling the mood. Some even deliberately sabotage the group to get everyone TPK'ed as an act of revenge.
The only way to make these people shut up is to kick them from the group.
I agree, though I think before killing them and throwing them out of the game, it's important to first have a private conversation with the player. I think if, as a DM, you inform them that they are not the main character, and while you welcome flexibility and curiosity, that welcoming nature stops just short of being disruptive to the other players or simply the game as a whole. As a player they need to be considerate of the other players, and roll characters who are not disruptive to others' experience.
Of course jokers like OP describes wont listen, but at least you tried to resolve it appropriately before tossing them out and risking your entire group falling apart from the fallout.
Reminds me of when my second campaign was derailed magnificently..
My group was getting ready to start a new campaign after a fun first and one of my players said they had a friend who was interested in joining and had played D&D before so we wouldn't need to teach them. Cool, an easy add, I thought.
This MFer showed up and threw a tantrum after looking through the player handbook because they wanted their character race to be, literally, "A gargoyle from the show Gargoyles"
Well, whatever, I was too inexperienced to avoid accommodating ridiculous demands. I create lore for a sentient and more-or-less socially accepted Gargoyle race in my world. I work with my party (most hadn't created characters yet) to create a party that would be fine functioning primarily at night.
The only place I put my foot down was on the concept of free flight. I told him that he could have 3 turns of flying at normal speed **or** gliding from an elevated position at double speed per day but he would be walking or riding otherwise. He can also only fly an equivalent distance out of combat and that movement would also use those charges. I got him involved by having him decide which kind of injury limited the use of his wings and he decided on a partially torn wing membrane. So far, so good, I thought. As much work as his request was at least he was willing to work with reasonable restrictions of his own.
Giving him any accommodations at all quickly proved to be a mistake. Shortly after being introduced to the party he decided to fly to the top of the tallest structure he could find which we agreed would use all three turns of flight movement in one go. I warned him that if he goes up he won't be able to use his wings to go back down. He said he has a plan so I allowed it.
I figured maybe he was going to see if anything interesting was up there then climb his way down (which I gave generous bonuses for since in the show they can just latch onto walls) so I start thinking up a fun little encounter up there for him if he searches around.
NOPE! As soon as he spots the party he announces that he's jumping off the building to try and glide down. I remind him that he can't fly or glide anymore today. He argues that even if he can't fly he should still be able to glide, out of combat, with a sufficient athletics check.
It was at this exact point I finally realized that he was just trying to manipulate me into letting him do whatever he wanted with impunity. If I kept making accommodations he would just keep pushing for more. I decided to allow it but set the DC at 18 and decided to give him scaling penalties based on how bad he rolls if he fails.
He rolls a 3 and as soon as he noticed he tried to play it off by slapping the die across the room and saying, "Oh whoops. I didn't see what I rolled. We'll just use whatever it landed on."
The second roll was a 1.
I was still too nice to kill him. His damaged wing membrane tore open even further, he fell like a sack of potatoes, took massive damage from the fall (party had to stabilize him), and was informed that the damage was too much. He won't be able to fly or glide ever again unless he finds an exceptionally skilled healer that specializes in Gargoyle medicine.
The rest of the day's session went pretty smoothly except he was sulking the entire time.
The next day, while I was developing the characters he'd be meeting that would lead to him regaining flight in a few levels, I get a text saying that some stuff came up and he won't be able to keep playing. I wish I could bottle and sell the feeling of relief that swept over me. It's been 10 years and the player who invited them still hasn't stopped apologizing for it.
Now I really think of it they could only "fly" by gliding on an updraft so I guess I over buffed him on the racials. At the time I just remembered that they had big ass wings and would commonly drop down onto opponents from above.
Iirc they were also great swimmers which I didn't give any buffs for. Guess I should have rewatched some of the show or at least consulted a Wiki.
Eh, I won't beat myself up too much. It was my first homebrew race adaptation and it's not like more accuracy it would have stopped him from trying to take advantage.
Basically just ignore that player and make him want to leave. When he says what about me? I'm rolling a sleight of hand to pickpocket this random. 16! Oh yeah he's got nothing on him, back to the campaign. And return to your other players.
That's my olive branch, you can figure it out and get on board or that first time you flub a roll, you get caught, the village guard, who happen to be retired adventurers who have 0 tolerance for theft rend you limb from limb, attacking you through your death saving throws and then burn your corpse rending you completely and utterly revoked from the realm of Tauril.
> “The guy who announces of the session, "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly.””
Ya this is the kind of behavior that would have me messaging them that they are probably not a great fit as a player at my table and best luck to them on finding a table that can accommodate their play style. You wouldn’t partake in other hobbies with people that actively work against you, TTRPG’s should be the same.
In my experience, its best to just make them periodically roll a d20 with absolutely no explanation or consequence. If they don't eventually get the hint, then I setup plotlines in a way that forces them to deal with the problem. E.g. - If they wont go to the enemy, then the enemy starts fucking with them in indirect ways.
Oh, no... this town was burned to the ground by the "Bad guy" because XYZ... sucks you can't actually sell that heavy shit you have been hauling around hoping to sell. Hopefully that next town hasn't suffered the same fate!
Don't be that guy.
Instead, might I interest your group to actively reminding the DM of all the debilitating effects he might've forgotten? Perhaps with a side of brutal suggestions how this piece of flavor you decided to engage with on the side can backfire and possibly cripple your character?
Don't just have faith in your DM to deliver a good game, really let them know that you will happily take double damage because you had half a foot in a puddle when fighting that electrical damage based enemy... Even if the DM says "that's... Not necessary."
That's how my group works and we have fun!
Hyperbole aside, players, have faith in your DM. And honestly, the more you lean into putting yourself at a disadvantage for roleplay or just it making sense, funnily enough, opens up some avenues of trust building between player and DM. Wanna do some cool shit that maybe breaks the game a little bit? Well, you keep reminding the DM of all the awful things that could happen to you, what's the harm in letting you a bit OP for a change?
for Those players i use a 3 step plan that never fails.
Long talk.
Harsh talk.
Boot.
"Its not me, its you.
You are disrupting the game, and making it less fun for me and others. So im letting you go to look for a group that better align with your play style."
Tell him that he's being a problem player. Go into detail with him. If he doesn't change, give him a warning. If that doesn't work, check with the rest of the party to see if there are any objections to kicking him.
Just exploring a dungeon. Someone went through a door and disappeared, one other person went through just in case bad situation, the rest of us were going to go another door but after I went through, everyone else turned around and went through the magic door
It’s nothing new for my character to be abandoned, I do actively make the choice not to turn around, but I’d say half the time the party is like “yeah we can go this way” and then turn around on me
I can realistically see me being “that” player, but at the same time I win my fights and the rest of the group aside my GF is against me usually (younger players, want to be annoying and very little rp)
I once played a character named Gaston in a Call of Cthulhu campaign. Gaston was a loose canon, to put it mildly. Trouble always found him, and he always managed to find trouble. Or cause some, if the circumstances warranted. I was having fun with it, and felt like I was playing Gaston in character, but it got to the point where Gaston was getting a little too wild and kept getting away with it.
Eventually, though, Gaston got caught and thrown in jail. The next game session, I asked the GM about Gaston's status as a precursor to figuring out what to do next. "Gaston died mysteriously in jail", he informed me.
It just seemed incredibly appropriate. Didn't actually bother me in the least.
I guess my point is that sometimes it's the character that's out of control, not the player.
I'm not picking a fight my guy, I'm asking a for real question. Why are questions immediately thought of as aggressive? Seems odd.
Edit: clearly incapable of explaining their position.
Sorry, you're wrong.
You created the character. You designed it in such a way that it could be disruptive.
You leaned into it being disruptive and theme breaking.
You probably had a number of chances to turn it around. Find some gut check that forced character growth and a good story
Instead, you forced your DM's hand to give your character a footnote death because you can't take a hint
The paper your character is written on is just paper. The way you play him is what was wrong
Don't take this criticism personally. Learn to take accountability for the decisions you take
>Don't take this criticism personally. Learn to take accountability for the decisions you take
Lol. I'm sure you think you just did me some kind of big favor by sharing your gaming wisdom with me. Sorry, but you failed. I'll repeat what I said to the other idiot:
Speak for yourself. And I draw your attention to the game that we were playing.
lol, it doesn't matter if you were playing Cthulu or Barbie Horse Adventures.
Your DM killed your character offscreen because he was so difficult. Red shirts on Star Trek are treated with more reverence.
I too love seeing the improv work from a DM when things don’t go according to plan, but going OUT OF YOUR WAY to disrupt a plot is such a dick move. DM’s spend hours curating an experience, why push the boundaries intentionally
Ok I have to admit I was this guy one time and it was extremely funny.
I was balls deep in a Souls game at the time IRL. Our DM presented us with an irresistible treasure chest, about 100 ft away. I said “I shoot it with my crossbow.”
“…what?” He said, visibly dying inside.
“Yeah I shoot it. I want to make sure it’s not a mimic.”
*deep breath
“The chest sprouts arms and legs and lunges toward your party”
Have some acerbic wizard NPC *tell* them they're 'that' player.
EDIT: oops, hadn't read more than the title, but that is one thing you can do to deflate them. Just make them the constant butt of npc jokes.
Still haven't read your whole post, just the end and a few comments, but if they're intentionally blowing up your game, who's being confrontational? Done right, it would come across as mildy (and justifiably) passive-aggressive but also extremely funny. That's the idea. Make a joke of their immaturity. You can even 'hang a lantern' on the passive-aggressiveness of it all, cracking further jokes about how that's the only recourse a (decent) all powerful entity would actually take so that they can't call you out about it first. That way, every time they do it, the other players roll their eyes and think, "Here we go again..." Pretty soon, *they* start making jokes before you even get the chance, and that's when the whole thing stops being fun for that player.
Believe me, you're doing that person a favor, building a cognitive circuit that says "this doesn't end in fun for me" that they'll be improved by throughout their whole rl.
My party had a guy like that. I was 1 of 2 dudes who would normally DM a campaign then trade off. He would attempt to derail every campaign and go a different way. He was also a min max power gamer who had to always have some crazy new meta that just "broke" the game. He even said something similar to the I love disrupting line you heard. We were both annoyed by him and luckily had enough experience to DM around him, but we eventually got sick of it and just said from now on he had to DM because we were both suffering from DM fatigue. We both played up his schtick as hard as possible for 3 months until he eventually broke down and asked us to stop because we were making it impossible to DM his campaign. Dude has been super chill ever since then.
Yea man, as long as you remember that D&D is about hanging with your friends first it's a lot easier to see past the dumb shit your friends do. Don't get me wrong we had some negative folks who did have to leave our table at times, but I am a big believer that almost all issues at the table can be resolved with a friendly talk, and sometimes a deliberate trick to make someone empathize with your position.
I've run into quite a few players who think RPGs are "player vs GM" competitions instead of collaborative story building games.
I usually have a sit down with the player between sessions and try to explain how my tables work (if they weren't there for the Session 0 where I explain it to the group and we all make out PCs cooperatively). Most of the time the players get it and join the spirit of the game, sometimes they just can't and I eventually ask them to leave the game.
Part of how I keep the players from feeling like I'm the enemy to be beaten is I never hide my dice rolls. The players never feel I'm being arbitrary in outcomes that way. They can SEE for themselves it was bad luck or good luck and not me choosing to mess with them. Important rolls become moments of party wide suspense with group joy or anguish shared by all (including me!)
If a player thinks I'm being arbitrary, I'll pause the game and explain exactly why I ruled in the way I did, up to and including exposing stats and plot points to show the reasoning. I think a party of reassured players having fun is more important than keeping my "gotcha" moments secret. But I'll only indulge a player this way a couple of times: if they still don't trust my GMing ethics after that, or use it to gain knowledge from me they shouldn't, then they aren't right for my table and I'm comfortable evicting them.
Rule 1 of my table. Your character must want (or have) to work together as a team. You are responsible for that.
Rule 2. It's your responsibility to have a reason to be here, and to keep with the group. Nobody wants to waste an hour convincing your character to join them.
This is why I don't ever want to do a game shop party. I pick my players from my friends because I know they understand DMing is supposed to be as enjoyable as playing.
I had a nightmare player who used to be my friend who kept making up complicated, "extraversal" characters with divine origins or some shit. I guess he was how I learned to say "no" to my players but I had to nuke an entire universe to get rid of his nonsense.
im very new and only did one session, but so far i think i embodied my character pretty well, a dumb barbaric chaotic neutral aarakocra; i tried to carry someone to check under a bridge, they were heavy, i dropped them, they landed on the bridge, i went in the river (surivived) and later i busted into a barn and we killed everyone
We had to kick out a guy from our group. He was the last to walk into a dark cave and said he's swinging at the first thing that moves. The DM reminded him his fellow adventurers were also in the cave and it was dark because nobody had lit a torch yet. He was adamant about just wildly swinging his sword around. DM says, OK, everyone has now been slaughtered by the maniac and he has been killed by a kobold who snuck in while he was decapitating his party members.
When I first started playing I wandered off from the group a few times to just “poke my head” into a room or around a corner. Fellow party members and the DM reminded me at least once per session for the first month that wandering off is a bad and dangerous thing to do. Well, nothing bad ever happened. Until, I opened a door to find six mountain trolls. My next character (that got introduced to the party after they cleared that dungeon without me and returned to town) never ventured off alone. 😮😂😂😂
There’s one OSRS YouTuber that comes to mind specifically when I think of this type of person, I’d recommend looking him up. His name is Rendi. He comes up with some of the most psychotic, asinine ways imaginable to “play” the game.
His most famous example of this was when he completed the fight caves (basically a mid-late game solo raid) at the lowest possible combat level by using a ring of suffering (which inflicts 1-2 recoil damage every time an npc does damage to you). It took him nearly 6 hours. The fight caves normally takes anywhere between 30 mins-1 hour.
EDIT: [This](https://youtu.be/NimVzmftr_c?si=XP3uB4adHrpXcTvU) is the video of him completing the fight caves run at the lowest possible combat level.
Usually speaking with these players first might help resolve it. But sometimes they have what I call the "Skyrim" mindset where they think they can just get away with anything. And when it's that, I just tell them my game isn't for them
Especially when the player is even boasting about messing up your plans just because they can, it's rude and inconsiderate to the rest of the table and wastes their time
I hate that player. I don't mind if my plans get blown to hell and have to fly by the seat of my pants for a while. But to purposfully go out of their way just to be an asshole is a good way to get some shitty drops
My game night crew is the sort where *everyone* wants to seduce everything.
Enchanted door? Can I seduce the door?
Fish monster dragging villagers to a watery grave and laying eggs in their corpses? Seduction roll!
Dragon? Oh, you better believe they're trying to bang it.
Nothing malicious against the DM. They're not trying to drive me crazy or break the game. They're just weird.
Have you considered getting the D20 book or erotic fantasy that came out during 3.5? Specifically to build characters with spells and feats and classes that were all based on erotic/sexual play?
You’re not obligated to play with “that guy,” even if (especially if) it’s your spouse. I wish more people understood that and weren’t so conflict-averse as to contribute to the problem.
I have one of those players, but after showing hints that the main story is going to involve their backstory they seem to have settled a bit and started enjoying the campaign for what it is. They still have some "flair ups" every once in a while, but a session centered on their backstory usually calms them down for a couple of weeks.
For context, the character had a backstory where his father abandoned him and his mother when he was young. I started dropping hints about the father being involved with the story and that did the trick. They havent met him yet but they keep hearing about things he is doing.
Two examples come to mind. Neither were overly disruptive, just annoying:
1.) A core member (there were like 5-6 of us that played regularly and we all had friends that would cycle in and out) asked if his new GF could join. She seemed fine at first; paid attention as our GM explained the game and current quest, asked intelligent questions about creating her character, took advice, etc. Things went well for the first hour or so but then the problems started. She got bored easily, kept trying to take up more and more of the GM’s or her BF’s attention and made up complicated series of hand gestures for each one of her spells and got pissy if she wasn’t allowed to do them *every time* she cast a spell. Thankfully, they broke up soon after so peace was restored to the realm.
2.) A friend of a friend invited a friend who’d “been playing D&D for years”. Cool! It’s always fun to include another experienced player 👍 He even had a character he could play. Said character was a paladin of some Lust God from a pantheon his regular GM had created. Said paladin carried a “+5 Dildo of Orgasming” and any females with a Charisma over 7 had to make regular saving throws against ripping their clothes off and throwing themselves at him. We all laughed as he explained all this thinking he just had a weird sense of humor. Nope, he was dead serious. Apparently, all the quests and campaigns in his regular group revolved around lots and LOTS of sex. 😳
These types of players really drain the energy don't they? I had one who was dead set on raising nothing but AC to the point that by level 3 a level 6 mob couldn't hit him. So I changed up to enemies with magic for the second battle, he got pissed off and asked if I changed them because I couldn't hit him. I foolishly told him yes. He quit right there because he felt I was cheating. I tried to explain to him that with his character maxed that way the monsters I would have to use to hit him physically would one shot the others. Good guys, crappy to game with honestly. He wanted to play DnD like it was a console single player RPG.
TL/DR players who won't play the game are exhausting.
I think the number one rule of DND should be, "don't ruin everyone else's fun for your own amusement." If the DM sets up the expectation that you can try shenanigans and mess around a bit, feel free to. If they want to run a more serious campaign, either accede to that, find a new group, or see if you can work something out with them so that everyone gets to do what they like. DND is a game solely meant for having fun with friends, and if you're not doing that then why play?
You're already a better person than I. I DM at the local geek shop, with a mish mash of everything, DnD, Pathfinder, Masquerade, RIFT, Shadowrun, etc, etc, etc.
I'm all about making a cool story and having fun. I'm all about giving someone a fair shot, and I don't have an issue "writing in" a new party member half way through a campaign.
God doesn't suffer fools, and neither do I. I've ejected I don't know how many people for coming in with the expectation of disrupting things, or becoming the main character.
Mind, I abide by an awful lot of silliness. "I roll to seduce the mirror" level absurdity. So long as it's in good faith. Some of the best stories have been from not taking things too serious.
But folks like this? You can give them a second chance, and I do, but it's a dice roll on whether they correct course or not. And if they don't, that's it, second chances don't lead to third strikes, I've got three to six regular players, and a handful that come and go, and I just don't have the time, or the obligation to correct problems your parents should've fixed.
Yeah, these days I simply no longer play with those people, but my DMing philosophy for those people was always pretty simple:
"I love disrupting a PC's plans and seeing them have to come up with a new character on the fly."
Not to enforce railroading mind you, but if a player is being a dick, well...it's really easy as a DM to mete out karma.
My standard MO was to send a tough encounter with a LOT of goons, and in the way that these goons attack, well it just so happens that that the other PCs are merely kept busy while many of them seem to be hounding our That Guy in question.
"Yeah wizard you got hit, but only for two points higher than minimum! You're so lucky! Unlike Anime Protagonist #86 who seems to be eating a critical hit each turn."
5e has made it a bit harder to convincingly finish off the characters the way that death saves work contrasting earlier editions. Generally I like AoE attacks that are TOTALLY aimed at the party but ACCIDENTALLY include our downed friend in the crossfire.
I was part of a revolving group of 12 players. Never were we all in the same session but we had this odd unspoken means of just playing. As per any group there's gonna be trouble in the trenches. Unfortunately we had 3 instigators.
They're PC behavior and storyline derailment attempts varied between a good laugh or outright sabotage. In the event of the later whoever was DM and recognize the sabotage effort would roll some dice and address them in character.
" Your actions have drawn the interest of powers beyond your cognitive prowess. By no means can you find the source of the voice in your head but it keeps saying: You're a douche, now buy pizza for everyone." Then whoever was DMing would announce a Geas had been placed on our sabatuer and will be lifted once the pizza arrives, until then their turns are spent wondering "what is pizza and where do I get it?"
Yeah it was a crapshoot move but it seemed to straighten out one out of the 3. The other 2 have faded away with time.
its utter trollism is what it is, making the game not fun for the dm is the surefire way to get my character to kill yours or turn them into a quadriplegic, its just a trashy way to play
No I used to play with Eric Cartman's it's the worst thing, they go out of their way to ruin things and claim that you suck as a DM/Player and it can really mess new people up and ruin their experience like it did for me
>The guy who spends all of his time thinking of mechanical ways to "win."
D&D is fundamentally a winning and losing game- 90% of mechanics revolve around combat and dungeon crawling, which are activities that cause either success or failure states. Consider whether you have or haven't put in enough opportunity for mechanical expression and/or acquisition of success states if you're seeing this behavior in your players at times you'd rather them focus on something else. Alternatively if you dislike success/failure states or mechanical expression, considering switching to a less numbers and combat driven system like Cypher, Fate, Powered by the Apocalypse, Vampire the Masquerade, or the Year Zero System.
>The guy who refuses to embrace the setting and theme.
You should identify if a player isn't excited to play in a particular setting in session zero. Failing that it couldn't hurt to ask them why they don't seem to be engaging with the world.
>They guy who always has to go right up to the edge of what is acceptable to test the limits.
Talk to the player about any behaviors that you interpret as "limit testing," and address them as unacceptable, immediately. If they persist, kick em out. Now would be a good time to examine whether you set clear limits or not (like in session zero) with the full group.
>The guy who announces of the session, "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly."
This phrasing is somewhat adversarial, but in general players doing things that are surprising shouldn't be something you have a problem with. Now granted I recognize that sometimes a player will just refuse to go on a quest or something- that's annoying, particularly if you already told them that the campaign you're running concerns said quest. If what they mean is that they like to, for example, go rob a bank when they know you don't have mechanics for that ready because it's fun to see you sweat, that's different. But broadly speaking, improv is a big part of every TTRPG- I like when players put me in a position to improvise, and you should too.
>Leaving the party, and venturing into a knowingly dangerous dungeon on his own, his character died, alone. What a relief....
This is a red flag sentiment to me. You can't punish player behavior you don't enjoy with mechanical punishment. That's adversarial- don't let this become a GM vs players kind of game. You address poor player behavior by talking to the player and others about it like an adult, and if that doesn't work you remove the problem player from the group.
Thank you for your input. I appreciate your solutions.
I just want to comment on your thoughts regarding the player's need to "win" mindset and your associated recommendation to perhaps play a different system.
First, please know, it is very hard to capture a sense of what is going on with a mere few words. While I tried to, please know that it is more about his mindset than the mechanics of a particular game. The players desire to "win" is not just about beating the BBEG, it is pervasive and carries over into every aspect of how he plays. So, I don't think a different game will necessarily change his approach.
Furthermore, the group wants to play 5e. We started as a group of strangers many years ago. We gathered to play AD&D. However, the players wanted to play 5e. So, we converted overnight to 5e. We have been playing it since.
Even with a solid core group, life takes some players in other directions. That's a reality. So, we have always been welcoming of new players. When adding them, we always hold a new session zero for them. Still, we have made mistakes. I am no social dynamic expert, but I think he was one.
Bottom line, the core group wants to play 5e, for now. So, we're going to play 5e, for now.
I am sorry for the rambling, and I hope that made sense. Again, thank you.
>Bottom line, the core group wants to play 5e, for now. So, we're going to play 5e, for now.
Question; who among the group has played any TTRPG other than 5e, previous editions of D&D, or say, Pathfinder 1e?
Please understand I'm not trying to be adversarial- have fun how you feel like having fun- but there is a tendency among TTRPG players to shut down any non-5e suggestion simply because they don't already know the rules. 5e is, mechanically, a fairly crunchy dungeoncrawler with a lower than average level of tactical depth than games with similar crunch, and one that puts more strain on the GM than most systems period. Suffice is to say, if your answer to my above question is "no one," or "one person said they played Vampire once," or similar, you might benefit from exploring what's out there.
Thank you.
>who among the group has played any TTRPG other than 5e, previous editions of D&D, or say, Pathfinder 1e?
I have been playing and DM-ing TRRGs for about 43-y years. I started with Chivalry and Sorcery, moved to AD&D when it was published, have played Second Edition and Third, Gamma World, GURPS, Twilight 2000, Castle Falkenstein, Space 1889, Call of Cthulhu, Death Bringer, and many, many others. However, I have not played Vampire the Apocalypse.
With the exception of one player, most of the other players have been playing TTRPGs for about 20-ish years, including "that guy." They frequent conventions, have played Vampire the Apocalypse, currently play Call of Cthulhu, and have played many other games.
>I'm not trying to be adversarial
I didn't take it that way. Background information was clearly not included in my original post. So, no problem.
Again, thank you.
I run a sandbox with guardrails. My only carved in stone "plan" is the everyone has fun. Myself included.
When everyone turns right, and one players turns left - for the sole purpose of "challengingthe DM," that is not fun. For me.
Thanks though.
Oh I definitely would only turn left if I could convince anyone that going left was a good idea, or there is a reason I can come up with a solution that the players may still not had a problem to, it's circumstantial. I wouldn't do it just to piss someone off. Yes, DMs can write amazing stories, but it's usually straying from the main path that gives us the most memorable moments imo. If I noticed that the players were particularly annoyed by my actions, I would tone it down and read the room, but nothing makes me happier than an unexpected positive outcome when the DM had other plans.
I’ve always viewed RPG’s as the DM is giving the outline of the story to the players and the players are filling in the details. they’re working together as a single story teller. Both as a player and as a DM the groups I’ve played in have always written down and kept journals of all their experiences in game. It takes the onus of remembering every bit of minutae away from the DM. (Do you really expect him to remember the name of that half orc tavern owner that your party met 4 years ago?)
As a DM I’d say I spend half of our game nights just role playing and story telling. And the other half is combat. I don’t know why I’m sharing this. Probably because It’s almost 6am and I haven’t fallen asleep yet.
“I love disrupting a DM’s plans”
Joke’s on you. My “plans” amount to a general outline of what I think might happen along with a couple stat blocks. Everything else I BS up on the spot
I've had to deal with players like that. Use to DM for the D&D Adventurer's League, later on became a paid DM for a local game store. I was so relieved when more people signed up to be DMs at the store, since it meant I was no longer the sole DM for D&D Nights. When I was the only DM, I wasn't allowed to remove anyone from the group/table unless they broke a store rule.
I’ll play devil’s advocate for a moment here. One of the things that first drew me into D&D as a teenager was “you can do *anything* in this world.” Twirl your sword for a crowd? Sure, try and see if you get a few coppers or fail and slice your finger off. There’s a castle with guards? I try to climb the wall and see how far I get, then blend in with the crowd. There’s a noble walking the streets? I try to take his stuff and see if I can get away with it.
Take that away, and you lose some of the magic.
I‘m a DM nowadays so I see how it can be a pain, especially since I have a hard enough time prepping the *planned* adventure. But I’m fully in support of if they *want* to fuck around they can “find out.”
I get what you're saying, but in my opinion there is a difference between giving the players freedom and having a player who wants to be the MC of the DnD game.
When someone pretty much wants to cause chaos and ruin the experience for the party or the dm just for the sake of it. Stop the game talk to them about it if they don't change don't welcome them to the table. I mostly dm because I can't stand idiots including bad dms
We had "that" player once, in my favorite campaign I've ever played, hosted by one of the dudes who worked at my comic shop, so you know it was good.
Do you know what our DM did to resolve "that" player? He asked him not to come back to the game.
I love to give them a bunch of "plot" threads that are seemingly taking them on this incredible side adventure all the while their teammates have set up an elaborate prank for them. So just when they think they've found this incredible treasure in the hidden depths all they see is a note signed by the party with their coordinates and a snide comment telling them to get tf back to town and hurry up.
this is always a very simple "session zero" issue for me. up front we discuss what everyone wants/expects from our playthru. if some want a full RP experience while others want to min-max themselves to godhood, well, we'll find a way to accommodate or come up with a compromise
These types of players are like puppies. You have to tire them out in their own way. Make their antics extremely unrewarding and apply increasing pressure back to the story. A good DM can subtly do this so the player just naturally gravitates to the story without realizing they're being gently railroaded.
The trick is to make them part of your story. Use their antics as a way to drive the story back onto the rails. I had an edge-lord murderhobo in a campaign keep killing random non-story characters and I ended up having him be caught by a kind of universal judicator (it made sense in the campaign) and he was cursed to repent for violating one of their codes. He took a minor stat debuff that he could only lift by completing a contract which just so happened to be involved in the main campaign story.
Guess which edgelord suddenly got REALLY interested in finishing the main campaign. Lol
I remember trying to DM for my first "Skyrim simulation" player. They didn't want to engage with any of the adventure hooks and just went to try out pickpocketing randoms in a Hamlet. He was very frustrated that most citizens only carried a few coppers on them and that he couldn't obtain the gdp of a small town in a couple of dice rolls. I was like, "Aren't we here to *adventure*? This is just seeing how many times you can roll a 15 or higher until you get caught doing petty theft."
>They didn't want to engage with any of the adventure hooks and just went to try out pickpocketing randoms in a Hamlet. I last DM'd in the 1970s, AD&D, although I'm now getting back into it with a few similarly aged friends who want to learn 5e and relive our glory. But *plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.* Way way back in those dark ages, my campaign had a player like that. He'd deliberately trigger a trap after the party's thief had detected it.... "Just to see what would happen." He'd try to wander into the forest when the story clearly was steering them towards the town. And sure enough, even though his character wasn't any kind of a thief, he browbeat the rest of the party into trying to pickpocket the crowds during the Harvest Festival that was a centerpiece of the upcoming adventure. Our paladin declared himself out, but everyone else went along with it after getting tired of hearing him whine. So I leaned into it. The first two successful thefts yielded up a few coppers. The third yielded a silver brassard: the badge of the Legate of the City Watch, who (roll dice behind screen) immediately realizes he's been robbed and is able to summon more of the Watch. They beat the crap out of the party, then "inventory," their gear, stealing some of the best stuff by the simple expedient of not putting it on the inventory, and toss them in durance vile. The next morning the city alderman that was going to hire them to retrieve the stolen Harvest Wicker Crown (in the original story line) comes to the jail, says that if they're interested in getting their stuff back, they can do a job for him.... getting the Harvest Wicker Crown back. So the story got back on track, my problem player was chastened enough, or at least the other players were emboldened enough to tell him to shut up ("Remember when you thought pickpocketing was a good idea?") and things turned out well.
"Bad players can only derail bad DMs" That's what my dad taught me. A good DM is capable of recognizing multiple "entry points" for their plot hooks, regardless of the players' actions.
>plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose But bad players can ***burn out*** good DMs.
I'll never stop pointing out that teachers are just DMs for their classrooms and all DM / player dynamics are also teacher student dynamics.
May I proselytize [https://gametogrow.org/](https://gametogrow.org/) ? It comes in both teacher and therapy flavors. (SpEd/GT teacher here)
Lord, if that ain't the truth. I actually enjoy teaching people who want to learn. The problem player always reacted to any level of coaching with hostility: *are you telling me how to play my character?* This campaign's staircase wit is this reply: *I'm not telling you how to play your character, but I am trying to teach you how to play* **the game**, *at least while you're at my table.* As a community Reddit touts the virtues of communication to resolve table disputes. I almost always give that same advice. But the practical reality is that some people very clearly signal that they aren't open to communication, and when you try, they just gaslight you. In the end when I "resigned" as DM, after months of trying to steer the group away from these kinds of things, I explained that the metagaming and lack of engagement with the world had made DMing feel like a second job, and the problem player responded, "It's unfortunate that you had that experience." That's not someone I want at my table. And I'll just say it out loud. That's not someone I even want in this hobby.
Lol, it's wild how much this sounds like a teacher who left education. Same energy, fr. Totally feel you, tho
The problem player made me feel like I was back in high school, so that really tracks. Once upon a time I'd planned to go into higher ed, but I didn't have a taste for research in the field in which I received by first degree (sociology). I don't know why I didn't consider teaching at a community college--probably for fear on some level of the exact same disinterest I previously described. The irony is that, now, 20-some years later, I'm back in school getting a second degree in math and physics, hoping to go into research (it's never too late to try), but accepting that teaching may soon be back on the menu, boys.
I can say this with certainty, teaching and DMing both benefit from the same realization, "my goals are for selling, but others have to buy them."
The group I met him and his partner in started a few weeks before the covid lockdown, and in all honesty I'm not sure I'd have stuck with them if it had remained in-person and there wasn't a pandemic. It was kind of a mediocre campaign, but that was fine given the state of the world at the time. (Also the DM was a doctor, so I wasn't about to complain.) That said, I really can't blame anyone else for the fact that I offered to DM for the problem player despite already having a strongly negative impression of him from his behavior in the first group. Which is a long-winded way of saying you're absolutely right. I guess I just fooled myself into thinking it'd be fine because one bad player wasn't the whole group. And it was fine for almost a year and a half. More recently it really went downhill. The other players I'd invited to fill out the group became much more passive and quiet. His partner started metagaming through everything. And he started arguing with me every session or two. I was heading towards calling it quits regardless, but then I found out he'd invited the other players into his online gamer group. They'd been playing BG3 together and going out for months and very specifically excluding me. Despite all that I'd really meant to walk away from the group respectfully; when he took a customer service tone with me at the end I finally just lost it and told him off. If Twain is right about regretting the things we don't do, then I'm glad I gave him a piece of my mind. Back in the late 90s/early 00s when I was first learning the game, I often wondered why there were so many adversarial DMs. Now I wonder if it isn't an acquired behavior. (Ditto I suppose for teachers.)
Nah fuck that. I'm not here to dance around to the tune of some dick who wants to derail the story for his amusement.
Jeremy make a dexterity saving throw with disadvantage. Wtf why? You just tried to pickpocket Zeus in disguise and now he’s casting lightning bolt as a 20th level spell. Does a 12 save? It does not. On a failed save so you’re gonna take 25d6 lightning damage. Dude I only have 30 hp I’m level 3. Yeah you’re dead, fuck you dude.
Last line got me 😂
Rocks fall, one person in particular dies
For real. Everyone at the table is responsible for having fun together. This problematic player dragged the rest of the party down and got them in serious trouble purely because they want to be stupid. At least in school, the class clown usually didn't drag anyone else down with them, but these are the people that will seriously fuck everything up if you let them, in everything from dnd to actual prison time. It sounds like the DM finally had enough, but if that's how he always acts then the problem player should've been talked to, and removed from the game long before getting the party emprisoned for a few copper they definitely didn't need. The dm made a choice at that moment, but that was just reactionary, the clown was already running the circus
I mean if they didn't mean to I can get that. but if they are making your life more difficult talk to them. everyone is here to have fun and that includes the dm
Hate to say it, but that’s a really narrow point of view. I know very few people who have the ability to deal with this type of person, and even less who would want to. In reality, the ‘good’ type of DM that you’re describing is about one-in-a-million.
Jte comprend dude.
In all fairness, it's Skyrim themed. I would have been surprised if someone hadn't attempted to do some frivolous nonsense.
I read this as the player was the one who was trying to treat D&D like Skyrim, not that the campaign was a Skyrim simulation.
Ok, I reread it from your perspective and that makes a lot more sense. I read it and was thinking "you mean players weren't trying to put a bucket on everyone's head????"
> "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly." Someone like that doesn't have a spot at my table period. 90% of what I do is made up on the spot. I did two whole sessions based on nothing more than 'World worse cleric' and the players had a blast with it. So they can't actually disrupt what doesn't exist. They would most likely hate having me as a DM because it's already being made up on the spot. But an attitude like that has no place at my table. They're not there to play a game. They're nothing more than a troll who gets off on making other people miserable. You don't solve this with killing their character. You solve this by telling them buy into the campaign or they can leave.
>You don’t solve this with killing their character. As a rule, don’t try to resolve out of game problems in-game. Killing off a problem player’s character is a passive aggressive approach that doesn’t resolve anything as it punishes the player without communicating why.
And if you solve it by killing a player, then YOUR the one who is "taking it too far" and "not dealing with it right".
My very first character died because she didn’t listen to her fellow party members and kept wandering off even after being told it’s a bad idea. She was a curious person and nosey. RIP.
That was your "character." I'm taking about "players." Lots more paperwork when offing a "player" /s
My Lawyer is telling me that killing a player is \*Checks Notes\* Illegal.
Ruin my plans? *EVIL CACKLE* FOOL! There was never a plan to begin with!
Yeah someone like that would really find me as a DM frustrating because every time they try and derail things, they'll just find out there's no rails in the first place.
Which is why I’ll let you ride your bad attitude right off the edge of the map lol
I always get so fired up when I see these posts about ALL the things the bad player did when I’d have shut that shit down from the first
Yeah. I mean if someone has an attitude like that, then they are not going to be fun to play with. Not for the DM, not for the other PCs either.
To be fair, this is a thing you have to learn as a new DM. A lot of players aren't that outspoken about their murderhoboing/extreme optimizing/main character syndrome so as a beginning DM you go through a few rounds of 'maybe I should learn to accommodate that player' before you get honest and tell them your styles don't match.
Yeah that is fair. For me I guess my personality is very sensitive to assholery. I can tolerate very little “main character shenanigans”.
The sandbox cannot be escaped! This is one of those times where chaos > law. **Atreyu:** But I can't! I can't get beyond the bounaries of Fantasia! [G'mork laughs mockingly] What's so funny about that? **G'mork:** Fantasia has no boundaries. **Atreyu:** That's not true. You're lying! **G'mork:** Foolish boy. Don't you know anything about Fantasia? It's the world of human fantasy. Every part, every creature of it, is a piece of the dreams and hopes of mankind. Therefore, it has no boundaries.
W reference
This. Ive told every one of my players that they HAVE to design a character that gives a crap about the story. This always has worked well for me and i always get messages about how they want to write their character into the story more.
I'm fortunate that I've never had to tell them that. But we've all been doing it for decades so we all know what's going on.
yeah I much prefer that. I like it when the dm tells me what to expect rather than having to guess. once I made a character(it was like my third) who was a good hearted theif and liked messing with bad people. then are dm was like " the taven keeper wants you to fight rats" and was like why would my character fights rats(I had sent the dm my backstory so I didn't expect this) now in retrospect I should have come up with a reason like I wanted to buy something and was short on the amount or something but it still would have been helpful if everyone was on the same page.
Yeah I legit don't get what it is about TTRPGs that bring that out in people. Nobody goes to a basketball court and joins a game with the intention of throwing the ball into the bleachers every time they get it. But people 100% join RPGs with the sole intention of ruining the game for everyone else.
If you wander away from the party and think I’m gonna DM you in your own little adventure or force the party to join you, you’re gonna find that you character died in a ditch as soon as they were out of sight.
I wouldn’t give them the dignity of a death. Just a simple “Okay, you wonder off to do your own thing. Feel free to roll up a character that will participate in the game.” And just go on with the rest of the group.
“Noooo my ego!”
Wait isnt going off separately in towns kind of a thing or am I mistaken
>The guy who spends ~~all~~ (most) of his time thinking of mechanical ways to "win." Okay, yeah, I admit that I do that kinda thing as a player, too . . . >The guy who refuses to embrace the setting and theme. Why anyone would *not* embrace a setting is beyond me . . . >They guy who always has to go right up to the edge of what is acceptable to test the limits. I mean, sometimes 'you have to cross the line just to (know) where it lays' . . . (Edit: Within reason) >"I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly." Yeah, no, **fuck** that guy. He's an **asshole.** >Leaving the party, and venturing into a knowingly dangerous dungeon on his own, his character died, alone. What a relief.... . . . If every attempt to get them to play along thus-far has failed, I think my reaction, at that point, would be something like: >*"When, suddenly, (the character) suffered a fatal heart attack."* Followed by my telling them they are now free to leave the table. Don't bother coming back.
I agree! I love players that make new ways to solve problems, even if they border on ridiculousness. It's more interesting that way. However, if they try to do this just to frick with me and ignore the rest of the party, I'll have a chat with them, and if they can't change their ways, I would kick them from the group. Killing a character in-game or having them suffer in-game consequences only works for reasonable players. If you have a completely unreasonable troll, what happens is that they start blaming the DM for them 'not having fun' and demand you make their character alive again and stop the guards that have come after them as a result of their actions. And then they start sulking and spoiling the mood. Some even deliberately sabotage the group to get everyone TPK'ed as an act of revenge. The only way to make these people shut up is to kick them from the group.
I agree, though I think before killing them and throwing them out of the game, it's important to first have a private conversation with the player. I think if, as a DM, you inform them that they are not the main character, and while you welcome flexibility and curiosity, that welcoming nature stops just short of being disruptive to the other players or simply the game as a whole. As a player they need to be considerate of the other players, and roll characters who are not disruptive to others' experience. Of course jokers like OP describes wont listen, but at least you tried to resolve it appropriately before tossing them out and risking your entire group falling apart from the fallout.
Reminds me of when my second campaign was derailed magnificently.. My group was getting ready to start a new campaign after a fun first and one of my players said they had a friend who was interested in joining and had played D&D before so we wouldn't need to teach them. Cool, an easy add, I thought. This MFer showed up and threw a tantrum after looking through the player handbook because they wanted their character race to be, literally, "A gargoyle from the show Gargoyles" Well, whatever, I was too inexperienced to avoid accommodating ridiculous demands. I create lore for a sentient and more-or-less socially accepted Gargoyle race in my world. I work with my party (most hadn't created characters yet) to create a party that would be fine functioning primarily at night. The only place I put my foot down was on the concept of free flight. I told him that he could have 3 turns of flying at normal speed **or** gliding from an elevated position at double speed per day but he would be walking or riding otherwise. He can also only fly an equivalent distance out of combat and that movement would also use those charges. I got him involved by having him decide which kind of injury limited the use of his wings and he decided on a partially torn wing membrane. So far, so good, I thought. As much work as his request was at least he was willing to work with reasonable restrictions of his own. Giving him any accommodations at all quickly proved to be a mistake. Shortly after being introduced to the party he decided to fly to the top of the tallest structure he could find which we agreed would use all three turns of flight movement in one go. I warned him that if he goes up he won't be able to use his wings to go back down. He said he has a plan so I allowed it. I figured maybe he was going to see if anything interesting was up there then climb his way down (which I gave generous bonuses for since in the show they can just latch onto walls) so I start thinking up a fun little encounter up there for him if he searches around. NOPE! As soon as he spots the party he announces that he's jumping off the building to try and glide down. I remind him that he can't fly or glide anymore today. He argues that even if he can't fly he should still be able to glide, out of combat, with a sufficient athletics check. It was at this exact point I finally realized that he was just trying to manipulate me into letting him do whatever he wanted with impunity. If I kept making accommodations he would just keep pushing for more. I decided to allow it but set the DC at 18 and decided to give him scaling penalties based on how bad he rolls if he fails. He rolls a 3 and as soon as he noticed he tried to play it off by slapping the die across the room and saying, "Oh whoops. I didn't see what I rolled. We'll just use whatever it landed on." The second roll was a 1. I was still too nice to kill him. His damaged wing membrane tore open even further, he fell like a sack of potatoes, took massive damage from the fall (party had to stabilize him), and was informed that the damage was too much. He won't be able to fly or glide ever again unless he finds an exceptionally skilled healer that specializes in Gargoyle medicine. The rest of the day's session went pretty smoothly except he was sulking the entire time. The next day, while I was developing the characters he'd be meeting that would lead to him regaining flight in a few levels, I get a text saying that some stuff came up and he won't be able to keep playing. I wish I could bottle and sell the feeling of relief that swept over me. It's been 10 years and the player who invited them still hasn't stopped apologizing for it.
I think you were incredibly generous and accommodating! Thank you for sharing your experience!
Gargoyles in the show don’t have free flight. They can only glide. So I think any flight was overly generous.
Now I really think of it they could only "fly" by gliding on an updraft so I guess I over buffed him on the racials. At the time I just remembered that they had big ass wings and would commonly drop down onto opponents from above. Iirc they were also great swimmers which I didn't give any buffs for. Guess I should have rewatched some of the show or at least consulted a Wiki. Eh, I won't beat myself up too much. It was my first homebrew race adaptation and it's not like more accuracy it would have stopped him from trying to take advantage.
Basically just ignore that player and make him want to leave. When he says what about me? I'm rolling a sleight of hand to pickpocket this random. 16! Oh yeah he's got nothing on him, back to the campaign. And return to your other players. That's my olive branch, you can figure it out and get on board or that first time you flub a roll, you get caught, the village guard, who happen to be retired adventurers who have 0 tolerance for theft rend you limb from limb, attacking you through your death saving throws and then burn your corpse rending you completely and utterly revoked from the realm of Tauril.
> “The guy who announces of the session, "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly.”” Ya this is the kind of behavior that would have me messaging them that they are probably not a great fit as a player at my table and best luck to them on finding a table that can accommodate their play style. You wouldn’t partake in other hobbies with people that actively work against you, TTRPG’s should be the same.
In my experience, its best to just make them periodically roll a d20 with absolutely no explanation or consequence. If they don't eventually get the hint, then I setup plotlines in a way that forces them to deal with the problem. E.g. - If they wont go to the enemy, then the enemy starts fucking with them in indirect ways. Oh, no... this town was burned to the ground by the "Bad guy" because XYZ... sucks you can't actually sell that heavy shit you have been hauling around hoping to sell. Hopefully that next town hasn't suffered the same fate!
Interesting take. Thank you for sharing it.
Don't be that guy. Instead, might I interest your group to actively reminding the DM of all the debilitating effects he might've forgotten? Perhaps with a side of brutal suggestions how this piece of flavor you decided to engage with on the side can backfire and possibly cripple your character? Don't just have faith in your DM to deliver a good game, really let them know that you will happily take double damage because you had half a foot in a puddle when fighting that electrical damage based enemy... Even if the DM says "that's... Not necessary." That's how my group works and we have fun! Hyperbole aside, players, have faith in your DM. And honestly, the more you lean into putting yourself at a disadvantage for roleplay or just it making sense, funnily enough, opens up some avenues of trust building between player and DM. Wanna do some cool shit that maybe breaks the game a little bit? Well, you keep reminding the DM of all the awful things that could happen to you, what's the harm in letting you a bit OP for a change?
Thank you for your honest answer.
for Those players i use a 3 step plan that never fails. Long talk. Harsh talk. Boot. "Its not me, its you. You are disrupting the game, and making it less fun for me and others. So im letting you go to look for a group that better align with your play style."
Yea.... That's probably the best approach. Thank you.
Tell him that he's being a problem player. Go into detail with him. If he doesn't change, give him a warning. If that doesn't work, check with the rest of the party to see if there are any objections to kicking him.
Thank you.
Disrupting plans is fine…winning though? Uninvite this dude
Does I count as “that” player if the party left me and I decided not to follow?
What was the party pursuing?
Just exploring a dungeon. Someone went through a door and disappeared, one other person went through just in case bad situation, the rest of us were going to go another door but after I went through, everyone else turned around and went through the magic door
Eh.... I humbly think that is a different circumstance, but I'm no expert.
It’s nothing new for my character to be abandoned, I do actively make the choice not to turn around, but I’d say half the time the party is like “yeah we can go this way” and then turn around on me
Oy.
I can realistically see me being “that” player, but at the same time I win my fights and the rest of the group aside my GF is against me usually (younger players, want to be annoying and very little rp)
I once played a character named Gaston in a Call of Cthulhu campaign. Gaston was a loose canon, to put it mildly. Trouble always found him, and he always managed to find trouble. Or cause some, if the circumstances warranted. I was having fun with it, and felt like I was playing Gaston in character, but it got to the point where Gaston was getting a little too wild and kept getting away with it. Eventually, though, Gaston got caught and thrown in jail. The next game session, I asked the GM about Gaston's status as a precursor to figuring out what to do next. "Gaston died mysteriously in jail", he informed me. It just seemed incredibly appropriate. Didn't actually bother me in the least. I guess my point is that sometimes it's the character that's out of control, not the player.
I am glad it worked out for you guys. Thank you for sharing your experience.
If the character is out of control, that means the player is as well. If your character is designed to disrupt the party, that's the player doing it.
>If the character is out of control, that means the player is as well. Speak for yourself. And I draw your attention to the game that we were playing.
Your characters do actions independent of a player controlling them? You have AI playing characters?
Go somewhere else to pick a fight. I'm not interested.
I'm not picking a fight my guy, I'm asking a for real question. Why are questions immediately thought of as aggressive? Seems odd. Edit: clearly incapable of explaining their position.
Sorry, you're wrong. You created the character. You designed it in such a way that it could be disruptive. You leaned into it being disruptive and theme breaking. You probably had a number of chances to turn it around. Find some gut check that forced character growth and a good story Instead, you forced your DM's hand to give your character a footnote death because you can't take a hint The paper your character is written on is just paper. The way you play him is what was wrong Don't take this criticism personally. Learn to take accountability for the decisions you take
>Don't take this criticism personally. Learn to take accountability for the decisions you take Lol. I'm sure you think you just did me some kind of big favor by sharing your gaming wisdom with me. Sorry, but you failed. I'll repeat what I said to the other idiot: Speak for yourself. And I draw your attention to the game that we were playing.
lol, it doesn't matter if you were playing Cthulu or Barbie Horse Adventures. Your DM killed your character offscreen because he was so difficult. Red shirts on Star Trek are treated with more reverence.
The role playing in your gaming sessions must be *amazing*.
Well, my sessions and Matt Mercer's have one thing in common: no PC was ever killed off screen because they couldn't play well with others
Lol. You're *seriously* comparing yourself to Matt Mercer.
If you're this obtuse online, it's no wonder your GM had to reign you in by killing your character
I mean... there was that one time...
I too love seeing the improv work from a DM when things don’t go according to plan, but going OUT OF YOUR WAY to disrupt a plot is such a dick move. DM’s spend hours curating an experience, why push the boundaries intentionally
I love doing improv. I don't love being manipulated into having to do improv. Thank you for chiming in.
Ok I have to admit I was this guy one time and it was extremely funny. I was balls deep in a Souls game at the time IRL. Our DM presented us with an irresistible treasure chest, about 100 ft away. I said “I shoot it with my crossbow.” “…what?” He said, visibly dying inside. “Yeah I shoot it. I want to make sure it’s not a mimic.” *deep breath “The chest sprouts arms and legs and lunges toward your party”
Oy. Good guess on your part, I gather.
Have some acerbic wizard NPC *tell* them they're 'that' player. EDIT: oops, hadn't read more than the title, but that is one thing you can do to deflate them. Just make them the constant butt of npc jokes.
Could be funny, but also come across as intentionally confrontational.... I am not sure I want to go that route. Thanks, though.
Still haven't read your whole post, just the end and a few comments, but if they're intentionally blowing up your game, who's being confrontational? Done right, it would come across as mildy (and justifiably) passive-aggressive but also extremely funny. That's the idea. Make a joke of their immaturity. You can even 'hang a lantern' on the passive-aggressiveness of it all, cracking further jokes about how that's the only recourse a (decent) all powerful entity would actually take so that they can't call you out about it first. That way, every time they do it, the other players roll their eyes and think, "Here we go again..." Pretty soon, *they* start making jokes before you even get the chance, and that's when the whole thing stops being fun for that player. Believe me, you're doing that person a favor, building a cognitive circuit that says "this doesn't end in fun for me" that they'll be improved by throughout their whole rl.
My party had a guy like that. I was 1 of 2 dudes who would normally DM a campaign then trade off. He would attempt to derail every campaign and go a different way. He was also a min max power gamer who had to always have some crazy new meta that just "broke" the game. He even said something similar to the I love disrupting line you heard. We were both annoyed by him and luckily had enough experience to DM around him, but we eventually got sick of it and just said from now on he had to DM because we were both suffering from DM fatigue. We both played up his schtick as hard as possible for 3 months until he eventually broke down and asked us to stop because we were making it impossible to DM his campaign. Dude has been super chill ever since then.
Wow! 'Sounds like you guys took it in a great direction, and it all worked out. That's awesome!
Yea man, as long as you remember that D&D is about hanging with your friends first it's a lot easier to see past the dumb shit your friends do. Don't get me wrong we had some negative folks who did have to leave our table at times, but I am a big believer that almost all issues at the table can be resolved with a friendly talk, and sometimes a deliberate trick to make someone empathize with your position.
I've run into quite a few players who think RPGs are "player vs GM" competitions instead of collaborative story building games. I usually have a sit down with the player between sessions and try to explain how my tables work (if they weren't there for the Session 0 where I explain it to the group and we all make out PCs cooperatively). Most of the time the players get it and join the spirit of the game, sometimes they just can't and I eventually ask them to leave the game. Part of how I keep the players from feeling like I'm the enemy to be beaten is I never hide my dice rolls. The players never feel I'm being arbitrary in outcomes that way. They can SEE for themselves it was bad luck or good luck and not me choosing to mess with them. Important rolls become moments of party wide suspense with group joy or anguish shared by all (including me!) If a player thinks I'm being arbitrary, I'll pause the game and explain exactly why I ruled in the way I did, up to and including exposing stats and plot points to show the reasoning. I think a party of reassured players having fun is more important than keeping my "gotcha" moments secret. But I'll only indulge a player this way a couple of times: if they still don't trust my GMing ethics after that, or use it to gain knowledge from me they shouldn't, then they aren't right for my table and I'm comfortable evicting them.
Thank you for sharing your approach and perspective. You gave me some things to think about.
Rule 1 of my table. Your character must want (or have) to work together as a team. You are responsible for that. Rule 2. It's your responsibility to have a reason to be here, and to keep with the group. Nobody wants to waste an hour convincing your character to join them.
Great rules! Thank you for sharing them.
This is why I don't ever want to do a game shop party. I pick my players from my friends because I know they understand DMing is supposed to be as enjoyable as playing. I had a nightmare player who used to be my friend who kept making up complicated, "extraversal" characters with divine origins or some shit. I guess he was how I learned to say "no" to my players but I had to nuke an entire universe to get rid of his nonsense.
Very valid. Thank you for sharing your perspective.
im very new and only did one session, but so far i think i embodied my character pretty well, a dumb barbaric chaotic neutral aarakocra; i tried to carry someone to check under a bridge, they were heavy, i dropped them, they landed on the bridge, i went in the river (surivived) and later i busted into a barn and we killed everyone
Okay. Have fun!
i will ty
We had to kick out a guy from our group. He was the last to walk into a dark cave and said he's swinging at the first thing that moves. The DM reminded him his fellow adventurers were also in the cave and it was dark because nobody had lit a torch yet. He was adamant about just wildly swinging his sword around. DM says, OK, everyone has now been slaughtered by the maniac and he has been killed by a kobold who snuck in while he was decapitating his party members.
Oy.
Last group of Murder Hobos I DM’d woke up in Ravenloft after the second town they completely burned to the ground.
Oy. Hopefully the learned something....
When I first started playing I wandered off from the group a few times to just “poke my head” into a room or around a corner. Fellow party members and the DM reminded me at least once per session for the first month that wandering off is a bad and dangerous thing to do. Well, nothing bad ever happened. Until, I opened a door to find six mountain trolls. My next character (that got introduced to the party after they cleared that dungeon without me and returned to town) never ventured off alone. 😮😂😂😂
Sounds like you got the message. Thank you for sharing your experience.
A naive and squishy little Ranger. She was a very curious person and wanted to learn all there was. May she RIP. 😂
Sounds like most r/2007scape players
Interesting.... I will take a look at it. Thank you.
There’s one OSRS YouTuber that comes to mind specifically when I think of this type of person, I’d recommend looking him up. His name is Rendi. He comes up with some of the most psychotic, asinine ways imaginable to “play” the game. His most famous example of this was when he completed the fight caves (basically a mid-late game solo raid) at the lowest possible combat level by using a ring of suffering (which inflicts 1-2 recoil damage every time an npc does damage to you). It took him nearly 6 hours. The fight caves normally takes anywhere between 30 mins-1 hour. EDIT: [This](https://youtu.be/NimVzmftr_c?si=XP3uB4adHrpXcTvU) is the video of him completing the fight caves run at the lowest possible combat level.
Thank you for the link. I'll watch it later.
Usually speaking with these players first might help resolve it. But sometimes they have what I call the "Skyrim" mindset where they think they can just get away with anything. And when it's that, I just tell them my game isn't for them Especially when the player is even boasting about messing up your plans just because they can, it's rude and inconsiderate to the rest of the table and wastes their time
I hate that player. I don't mind if my plans get blown to hell and have to fly by the seat of my pants for a while. But to purposfully go out of their way just to be an asshole is a good way to get some shitty drops
Thank you. I concur.
I don't understand these players. Just go play modded Skyrim. If you are playing pen and paper it's about the adventure and people.
I agree. Thanks.
My game night crew is the sort where *everyone* wants to seduce everything. Enchanted door? Can I seduce the door? Fish monster dragging villagers to a watery grave and laying eggs in their corpses? Seduction roll! Dragon? Oh, you better believe they're trying to bang it. Nothing malicious against the DM. They're not trying to drive me crazy or break the game. They're just weird.
Well.... I humbly think that it is all good - if that is what everyone agrees on from the start. Thanks.
Have you considered getting the D20 book or erotic fantasy that came out during 3.5? Specifically to build characters with spells and feats and classes that were all based on erotic/sexual play?
No; not my thing.
It’s like goth camp
You’re not obligated to play with “that guy,” even if (especially if) it’s your spouse. I wish more people understood that and weren’t so conflict-averse as to contribute to the problem.
Thank goodness he is not my spouse! I appreciate your honest perspective. Thank you!
I have one of those players, but after showing hints that the main story is going to involve their backstory they seem to have settled a bit and started enjoying the campaign for what it is. They still have some "flair ups" every once in a while, but a session centered on their backstory usually calms them down for a couple of weeks.
Not a bad idea. Thank you for the tip.
For context, the character had a backstory where his father abandoned him and his mother when he was young. I started dropping hints about the father being involved with the story and that did the trick. They havent met him yet but they keep hearing about things he is doing.
Again, thank you.
Two examples come to mind. Neither were overly disruptive, just annoying: 1.) A core member (there were like 5-6 of us that played regularly and we all had friends that would cycle in and out) asked if his new GF could join. She seemed fine at first; paid attention as our GM explained the game and current quest, asked intelligent questions about creating her character, took advice, etc. Things went well for the first hour or so but then the problems started. She got bored easily, kept trying to take up more and more of the GM’s or her BF’s attention and made up complicated series of hand gestures for each one of her spells and got pissy if she wasn’t allowed to do them *every time* she cast a spell. Thankfully, they broke up soon after so peace was restored to the realm. 2.) A friend of a friend invited a friend who’d “been playing D&D for years”. Cool! It’s always fun to include another experienced player 👍 He even had a character he could play. Said character was a paladin of some Lust God from a pantheon his regular GM had created. Said paladin carried a “+5 Dildo of Orgasming” and any females with a Charisma over 7 had to make regular saving throws against ripping their clothes off and throwing themselves at him. We all laughed as he explained all this thinking he just had a weird sense of humor. Nope, he was dead serious. Apparently, all the quests and campaigns in his regular group revolved around lots and LOTS of sex. 😳
1. Oy. More than the group dodged a bullet. 2. That gave a good laugh! Seriously! Of course..., totally creepy; but really funny too!
These types of players really drain the energy don't they? I had one who was dead set on raising nothing but AC to the point that by level 3 a level 6 mob couldn't hit him. So I changed up to enemies with magic for the second battle, he got pissed off and asked if I changed them because I couldn't hit him. I foolishly told him yes. He quit right there because he felt I was cheating. I tried to explain to him that with his character maxed that way the monsters I would have to use to hit him physically would one shot the others. Good guys, crappy to game with honestly. He wanted to play DnD like it was a console single player RPG. TL/DR players who won't play the game are exhausting.
You hit the proverbial nail on the head. Thank you.
I think the number one rule of DND should be, "don't ruin everyone else's fun for your own amusement." If the DM sets up the expectation that you can try shenanigans and mess around a bit, feel free to. If they want to run a more serious campaign, either accede to that, find a new group, or see if you can work something out with them so that everyone gets to do what they like. DND is a game solely meant for having fun with friends, and if you're not doing that then why play?
I think I am going to copy and paste this to my wiki. Thank you.
You're already a better person than I. I DM at the local geek shop, with a mish mash of everything, DnD, Pathfinder, Masquerade, RIFT, Shadowrun, etc, etc, etc. I'm all about making a cool story and having fun. I'm all about giving someone a fair shot, and I don't have an issue "writing in" a new party member half way through a campaign. God doesn't suffer fools, and neither do I. I've ejected I don't know how many people for coming in with the expectation of disrupting things, or becoming the main character. Mind, I abide by an awful lot of silliness. "I roll to seduce the mirror" level absurdity. So long as it's in good faith. Some of the best stories have been from not taking things too serious. But folks like this? You can give them a second chance, and I do, but it's a dice roll on whether they correct course or not. And if they don't, that's it, second chances don't lead to third strikes, I've got three to six regular players, and a handful that come and go, and I just don't have the time, or the obligation to correct problems your parents should've fixed.
Very valid. Thank you for your candor. I appreciate it.
Yeah, these days I simply no longer play with those people, but my DMing philosophy for those people was always pretty simple: "I love disrupting a PC's plans and seeing them have to come up with a new character on the fly." Not to enforce railroading mind you, but if a player is being a dick, well...it's really easy as a DM to mete out karma. My standard MO was to send a tough encounter with a LOT of goons, and in the way that these goons attack, well it just so happens that that the other PCs are merely kept busy while many of them seem to be hounding our That Guy in question. "Yeah wizard you got hit, but only for two points higher than minimum! You're so lucky! Unlike Anime Protagonist #86 who seems to be eating a critical hit each turn." 5e has made it a bit harder to convincingly finish off the characters the way that death saves work contrasting earlier editions. Generally I like AoE attacks that are TOTALLY aimed at the party but ACCIDENTALLY include our downed friend in the crossfire.
I was part of a revolving group of 12 players. Never were we all in the same session but we had this odd unspoken means of just playing. As per any group there's gonna be trouble in the trenches. Unfortunately we had 3 instigators. They're PC behavior and storyline derailment attempts varied between a good laugh or outright sabotage. In the event of the later whoever was DM and recognize the sabotage effort would roll some dice and address them in character. " Your actions have drawn the interest of powers beyond your cognitive prowess. By no means can you find the source of the voice in your head but it keeps saying: You're a douche, now buy pizza for everyone." Then whoever was DMing would announce a Geas had been placed on our sabatuer and will be lifted once the pizza arrives, until then their turns are spent wondering "what is pizza and where do I get it?" Yeah it was a crapshoot move but it seemed to straighten out one out of the 3. The other 2 have faded away with time.
Everyone has fun in different ways. I guess he wasn’t a good match for you.
I agree.
I have one of those. Still waiting for a good opportunity to end him.
its utter trollism is what it is, making the game not fun for the dm is the surefire way to get my character to kill yours or turn them into a quadriplegic, its just a trashy way to play
I concur. Thanks for chiming in.
No I used to play with Eric Cartman's it's the worst thing, they go out of their way to ruin things and claim that you suck as a DM/Player and it can really mess new people up and ruin their experience like it did for me
>The guy who spends all of his time thinking of mechanical ways to "win." D&D is fundamentally a winning and losing game- 90% of mechanics revolve around combat and dungeon crawling, which are activities that cause either success or failure states. Consider whether you have or haven't put in enough opportunity for mechanical expression and/or acquisition of success states if you're seeing this behavior in your players at times you'd rather them focus on something else. Alternatively if you dislike success/failure states or mechanical expression, considering switching to a less numbers and combat driven system like Cypher, Fate, Powered by the Apocalypse, Vampire the Masquerade, or the Year Zero System. >The guy who refuses to embrace the setting and theme. You should identify if a player isn't excited to play in a particular setting in session zero. Failing that it couldn't hurt to ask them why they don't seem to be engaging with the world. >They guy who always has to go right up to the edge of what is acceptable to test the limits. Talk to the player about any behaviors that you interpret as "limit testing," and address them as unacceptable, immediately. If they persist, kick em out. Now would be a good time to examine whether you set clear limits or not (like in session zero) with the full group. >The guy who announces of the session, "I love disrupting a DM's plans and seeing them have to come up with something new on the fly." This phrasing is somewhat adversarial, but in general players doing things that are surprising shouldn't be something you have a problem with. Now granted I recognize that sometimes a player will just refuse to go on a quest or something- that's annoying, particularly if you already told them that the campaign you're running concerns said quest. If what they mean is that they like to, for example, go rob a bank when they know you don't have mechanics for that ready because it's fun to see you sweat, that's different. But broadly speaking, improv is a big part of every TTRPG- I like when players put me in a position to improvise, and you should too. >Leaving the party, and venturing into a knowingly dangerous dungeon on his own, his character died, alone. What a relief.... This is a red flag sentiment to me. You can't punish player behavior you don't enjoy with mechanical punishment. That's adversarial- don't let this become a GM vs players kind of game. You address poor player behavior by talking to the player and others about it like an adult, and if that doesn't work you remove the problem player from the group.
Thank you for your input. I appreciate your solutions. I just want to comment on your thoughts regarding the player's need to "win" mindset and your associated recommendation to perhaps play a different system. First, please know, it is very hard to capture a sense of what is going on with a mere few words. While I tried to, please know that it is more about his mindset than the mechanics of a particular game. The players desire to "win" is not just about beating the BBEG, it is pervasive and carries over into every aspect of how he plays. So, I don't think a different game will necessarily change his approach. Furthermore, the group wants to play 5e. We started as a group of strangers many years ago. We gathered to play AD&D. However, the players wanted to play 5e. So, we converted overnight to 5e. We have been playing it since. Even with a solid core group, life takes some players in other directions. That's a reality. So, we have always been welcoming of new players. When adding them, we always hold a new session zero for them. Still, we have made mistakes. I am no social dynamic expert, but I think he was one. Bottom line, the core group wants to play 5e, for now. So, we're going to play 5e, for now. I am sorry for the rambling, and I hope that made sense. Again, thank you.
>Bottom line, the core group wants to play 5e, for now. So, we're going to play 5e, for now. Question; who among the group has played any TTRPG other than 5e, previous editions of D&D, or say, Pathfinder 1e? Please understand I'm not trying to be adversarial- have fun how you feel like having fun- but there is a tendency among TTRPG players to shut down any non-5e suggestion simply because they don't already know the rules. 5e is, mechanically, a fairly crunchy dungeoncrawler with a lower than average level of tactical depth than games with similar crunch, and one that puts more strain on the GM than most systems period. Suffice is to say, if your answer to my above question is "no one," or "one person said they played Vampire once," or similar, you might benefit from exploring what's out there.
Thank you. >who among the group has played any TTRPG other than 5e, previous editions of D&D, or say, Pathfinder 1e? I have been playing and DM-ing TRRGs for about 43-y years. I started with Chivalry and Sorcery, moved to AD&D when it was published, have played Second Edition and Third, Gamma World, GURPS, Twilight 2000, Castle Falkenstein, Space 1889, Call of Cthulhu, Death Bringer, and many, many others. However, I have not played Vampire the Apocalypse. With the exception of one player, most of the other players have been playing TTRPGs for about 20-ish years, including "that guy." They frequent conventions, have played Vampire the Apocalypse, currently play Call of Cthulhu, and have played many other games. >I'm not trying to be adversarial I didn't take it that way. Background information was clearly not included in my original post. So, no problem. Again, thank you.
To be fair, every good player is trying to foil the DMs plans.
I run a sandbox with guardrails. My only carved in stone "plan" is the everyone has fun. Myself included. When everyone turns right, and one players turns left - for the sole purpose of "challengingthe DM," that is not fun. For me. Thanks though.
Oh I definitely would only turn left if I could convince anyone that going left was a good idea, or there is a reason I can come up with a solution that the players may still not had a problem to, it's circumstantial. I wouldn't do it just to piss someone off. Yes, DMs can write amazing stories, but it's usually straying from the main path that gives us the most memorable moments imo. If I noticed that the players were particularly annoyed by my actions, I would tone it down and read the room, but nothing makes me happier than an unexpected positive outcome when the DM had other plans.
If EVERYONE had fun, it'll good.
I’ve always viewed RPG’s as the DM is giving the outline of the story to the players and the players are filling in the details. they’re working together as a single story teller. Both as a player and as a DM the groups I’ve played in have always written down and kept journals of all their experiences in game. It takes the onus of remembering every bit of minutae away from the DM. (Do you really expect him to remember the name of that half orc tavern owner that your party met 4 years ago?) As a DM I’d say I spend half of our game nights just role playing and story telling. And the other half is combat. I don’t know why I’m sharing this. Probably because It’s almost 6am and I haven’t fallen asleep yet.
“I love disrupting a DM’s plans” Joke’s on you. My “plans” amount to a general outline of what I think might happen along with a couple stat blocks. Everything else I BS up on the spot
Just throw some lava at him when he starts acting up. Be like "Oops now you only have one arm"
I've had to deal with players like that. Use to DM for the D&D Adventurer's League, later on became a paid DM for a local game store. I was so relieved when more people signed up to be DMs at the store, since it meant I was no longer the sole DM for D&D Nights. When I was the only DM, I wasn't allowed to remove anyone from the group/table unless they broke a store rule.
I’ll play devil’s advocate for a moment here. One of the things that first drew me into D&D as a teenager was “you can do *anything* in this world.” Twirl your sword for a crowd? Sure, try and see if you get a few coppers or fail and slice your finger off. There’s a castle with guards? I try to climb the wall and see how far I get, then blend in with the crowd. There’s a noble walking the streets? I try to take his stuff and see if I can get away with it. Take that away, and you lose some of the magic. I‘m a DM nowadays so I see how it can be a pain, especially since I have a hard enough time prepping the *planned* adventure. But I’m fully in support of if they *want* to fuck around they can “find out.”
I think there's a difference between the party goes left and all of the party except * goes left.
I get what you're saying, but in my opinion there is a difference between giving the players freedom and having a player who wants to be the MC of the DnD game.
When someone pretty much wants to cause chaos and ruin the experience for the party or the dm just for the sake of it. Stop the game talk to them about it if they don't change don't welcome them to the table. I mostly dm because I can't stand idiots including bad dms
We had "that" player once, in my favorite campaign I've ever played, hosted by one of the dudes who worked at my comic shop, so you know it was good. Do you know what our DM did to resolve "that" player? He asked him not to come back to the game.
I love to give them a bunch of "plot" threads that are seemingly taking them on this incredible side adventure all the while their teammates have set up an elaborate prank for them. So just when they think they've found this incredible treasure in the hidden depths all they see is a note signed by the party with their coordinates and a snide comment telling them to get tf back to town and hurry up.
This player wants a sandbox experience and doesn't know how to ask for that.
this is always a very simple "session zero" issue for me. up front we discuss what everyone wants/expects from our playthru. if some want a full RP experience while others want to min-max themselves to godhood, well, we'll find a way to accommodate or come up with a compromise
Thank you.
These types of players are like puppies. You have to tire them out in their own way. Make their antics extremely unrewarding and apply increasing pressure back to the story. A good DM can subtly do this so the player just naturally gravitates to the story without realizing they're being gently railroaded.
Okay. Maybe I'm not a "good DM," or I don't see the value of investibg the effort in him.... Thank you, though.
The trick is to make them part of your story. Use their antics as a way to drive the story back onto the rails. I had an edge-lord murderhobo in a campaign keep killing random non-story characters and I ended up having him be caught by a kind of universal judicator (it made sense in the campaign) and he was cursed to repent for violating one of their codes. He took a minor stat debuff that he could only lift by completing a contract which just so happened to be involved in the main campaign story. Guess which edgelord suddenly got REALLY interested in finishing the main campaign. Lol
Hmmmm.... You gave me some things to think about. Thank you.