Would you invite this player?

I’ve learned the hard way that good friends don’t always make for good people to game with. I put up with a lot of nonsense from friends at the gaming table, until I didn’t.

But I suppose it depends on how much you’re willing to manage the potential difficulties. A lot of what you described could in theory be easily resolved. Stuff like, if he tries to steal from other PCS, “I’m sorry, but PCs aren’t allowed to steal from the party and other PCs in my games;” and, for the spotlight hogging “Okay, we’ll get to you when your turn comes around, but PC#2 is currently doing something.”

It is a gamble, but as [MENTION=3400]billd91[/MENTION] said, we all had to start somewhere as players, probably somewhere near the bottom.

Retreater said:

(and good friend)

Click to expand...

Follow your gut. This is a game, not a job, and you have no duty to try to make things work.

You have a group and group size you like and are not comfortable with this players gaming style. You would be bringing him into the group with the assumption that you can teach and change him. Maybe that is the case, but as in dating and marriage, it generally just creates problems, resentment, and a messy breakup. Also, you don't sound enthused about taking on the role of game-etiquette and game-mastering coach.

Most importantly, how will this impact your relationship with your girlfriend? Maybe she will be disappointed if you don't bring him in and give him a chance. But if things don't work out and if it gets to the point where you want to boot him, it could she that creating negative drama in your relationship--especially if she still wants to continue in his game.

It is easy to shrug off potential issues you see when considering a new player, but it is much more difficult to dealing with those issues if they later arise.

You have an easy out -- you already have a large group and are uncomfortable bringing on another person.

If you strongly feel that you should give him a chance (or show your girl friend that you are), then tell him you can fit in another player, but invite him to join for one session as a guest star, perhaps when someone else can't make it. If he surprises you and gells with the rest of the group, perhaps then you can try to work him in. That give you a way to not invite him back in a way that saves face if it doesn't work out or make him him feel good if he is asked to join as a regular member of the group (the group really liked playing with you and while I normally don't run such large groups, I'll try to make it work).

I wouldn't call him out for anti-social play, but definitely do encourage everyone to make a character that plays well with others. If "what his character would do" aligns with the well-adjusted social thing to do, then that should solve that problem.

Aside from that, it sounds like it could be a good experience for him. If you're willing to run for seven players, or if you expect that some of those players might not be able to make it every week, then give him a shot.

billd91 said:

It's hard to argue against that advice, but I'm going to. We all sucked as players at one time or another and, if we got better, we got better because some DM took a chance on us and we learned from the experience. Since there is some flexibility with the group size due to absences, he's a generally known quantity, and he's enthusiastic - I'd recommend taking him on but laying down some ground rules about your group's style (particularly on the teamwork/stealing from the party thing). Sooner or later he's going to have to learn that his own personal style preference will have to be compromised with the style preferences of other people at the table, and an experienced DM coming from a generally friendly direction can help with that.

Click to expand...

Yes, I stunk as a player and GM, still do, and I have been doing it since '79. I'm always keeping an eye towards being better at both. Though with this being the seventh player, I'd be leery of adding someone that could take up over their one seventh of allotted table space. It is a hard call, and you are totally right in that we all had to start somewhere, and the final arbitrator is [MENTION=42040]Retreater[/MENTION] and if they think the cost-benefit analysis means that taking them on is a positive thing. I also agree that setting forth the parameters of the game beforehand is really crucial.

You have some responsibility to your current group. Ask them what they think about the whole thing.

You should talk to this person as if they were a reasonable adult before they start to play with you. You can talk about their habits you've observed, and how they won't fit into your current game. If they can't hack that discussion, don't let them play. If *you* can't hack this conversation, maybe you need to fill out the, "have difficult conversation," skillset before you can take on such a player.

People are quick to say, "this person sounds like a jerk". But if nobody ever talks to him about it, he may not realize that his habits are problematic. Jerkitude is a learned behavior. It can be unlearned, if you have a decent teacher.

"Thats what my character would do!" in the context of stealing from other players is almost always a death knell for that player in my group, and if I'm in a group with said player and not running, it's almost always a death knell for me continuing to play with that group.

I've lost whole groups over one guy saying "That's what my character would do!" in "defense" of some jerkish behaviour. I don't tolerate it. 1 warning, then you're out.

Tell him you have too many players, but invite him over to watch.

He can experience the game, but not affect it.

Blue said:

Tell him you have too many players, but invite him over to watch.

He can experience the game, but not affect it.

Click to expand...

Even better, have him help DM. For example, he can run some of the NPCs or help run combat. Most people are not going to enjoy just setting and watching other people play.

The phrase “that's what my character would do" is such the red flag for me as, almost without fail, it has nothing to do with roleplay and everything to do with just being an excuse to be a jerk in the game. If that is honestly what your character would do, why is your character working these other, and why should they let him?

John Desmarais said:

The phrase “that's what my character would do" is such the red flag for me as, almost without fail, it has nothing to do with roleplay and everything to do with just being an excuse to be a jerk in the game.

Click to expand...

Good roleplaying with a group is *learned*. It is unlikely to come fully formed form a player's head. For those of us who get to it, it is either by having really good examples to learn from, or the school of hard knocks where things go wrong and we feel one another are jerks from time to time, until we figure out what works and what doesn't.

The real question is - has this person had good examples to learn from, or the experience to know better? If not, holding that against them is like holding against a toddler that they haven't gotten the knack of table manners yet.

There is a player I know who got her start playing via solo games run by her boyfriend. When said boyfriend integrated her into another game, it went... poorly. All games she had ever experienced were all about her. The very idea of sharing spotlight... just hadn't ever been a thing that needed to be thought. She played as if she were the center of the universe, because she always had been, and had no context for considering how that would operate with other people, who were also the centers of their own universes...

The poor boyfriend, had not realized this problem would occur. He had no context to realize that she *wouldn't* just naturally get the idea of sharing around spotlight. He just figured it came naturally, because it seemed that everyone else he gamed with knew it, and hadn't thought abut where it came from until he saw a case where it wasn't there...

She eventually figured it out, and she's a fine gamer now. But, there was some pain for a while.