Booting a Player (and setting a good example?)

[Cyrinishad]

...Don't be a wimp and use a dice box. Because now you are punishing OTHER PLAYERS and NOT THE CHEATER.

Come on now Jasper, it is totally unnecessary to characterize either myself or my suggestion as being a "wimp". I thought I had clearly stated that I am pro-confrontation in all scenarios, because it is the absolute responsibility of the DM control his or her table. I did not suggest punishing other players, I suggested that all players follow the same etiquette at the table, even if it is a change to mitigate the flaws of a "problem player".
I think the rest of your perspective presented in your post is entirely reasonable, and would not characterize anyone else's advice as "weak" or "wimpy"... please afford me the same courtesy in the future.

 

[jasper]

Come on now Jasper, it is totally unnecessary to characterize either myself or my suggestion as being a "wimp". I thought I had clearly stated that I am pro-confrontation in all scenarios, because it is the absolute responsibility of the DM control his or her table. I did not suggest punishing other players, I suggested that all players follow the same etiquette at the table, even if it is a change to mitigate the flaws of a "problem player".
I think the rest of your perspective presented in your post is entirely reasonable, and would not characterize anyone else's advice as "weak" or "wimpy"... please afford me the same courtesy in the future.

Sorry about the wimp. BUT you are still punishing the other players. Jasper is the one cheating. If you were in the Army you would be dropping every one in the squad for Jasper being in the wrong. You are just cloaking the punishment using "...same etiquette at the table, even if it is a change to mitigate the flaws of a "problem player"....
You have a problem player. Talk once, if problem still exists. Bounce the player. The only two reasons I would accept to keep the problem player are 1. "Your mother said let little Jasper play!" or 2. "I am an addict to playing D&D, I don't care who I play with along as I play!'.
Remember "No gaming is better than bad gaming!"

 

[Cyrinishad]

Sorry about the wimp. BUT you are still punishing the other players. Jasper is the one cheating. If you were in the Army you would be dropping every one in the squad for Jasper being in the wrong. You are just cloaking the punishment using "...same etiquette at the table, even if it is a change to mitigate the flaws of a "problem player"....
You have a problem player. Talk once, if problem still exists. Bounce the player. The only two reasons I would accept to keep the problem player are 1. "Your mother said let little Jasper play!" or 2. "I am an addict to playing D&D, I don't care who I play with along as I play!'.
Remember "No gaming is better than bad gaming!"

Agreed, no gaming is always better than bad gaming... and I appreciate the apology, thank you.

 

[iserith]

This may be an unpopular sentiment, but:

This doesn't have to fall on the DM. While the game confers to the DM control over the campaign world, the adventures therein, and the rules themselves, this does not confer any special privilege in the hierarchy of the social group. The DM is just like everyone else.

While many people defer to the DM as the de facto "leader" of sorts even outside the context of the game, I think it is the responsibility of the entire group to sort out situations like this. The players should think twice before foisting this responsibility on the DM.

Me, personally, I have no problem telling someone what time it is whether I'm the DM or not. I would not, however, put it solely on my DM to deal with a social problem in the group. The DM isn't in control outside the context of the game.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

This may be an unpopular sentiment, but:

This doesn't have to fall on the DM. While the game confers to the DM control over the campaign world, the adventures therein, and the rules themselves, this does not confer any special privilege in the hierarchy of the social group. The DM is just like everyone else.

While many people defer to the DM as the de facto "leader" of sorts even outside the context of the game, I think it is the responsibility of the entire group to sort out situations like this. The players should think twice before foisting this responsibility on the DM.

Me, personally, I have no problem telling someone what time it is whether I'm the DM or not. I would not, however, put it solely on my DM to deal with a social problem in the group. The DM isn't in control outside the context of the game.

It doesn't have to fall on the DM. But as you note, the DM serving as "leader" is kind of the norm. Furthermore, the person asking for advice right now happens to be a DM; the players are, to the best of our knowledge, not here to be told that it's their responsibility too. So what would you say in this context?

 

[iserith]

It doesn't have to fall on the DM. But as you note, the DM serving as "leader" is kind of the norm. Furthermore, the person asking for advice right now happens to be a DM; the players are, to the best of our knowledge, not here to be told that it's their responsibility too. So what would you say in this context?

I would say I'm expressing my opinion to everyone reading who might be in a similar situation, not just the OP and his or her particular situation.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

It can help to remember:

Someone may not be a jerk - but they can engage in jerk-like behaviours.

So, it's not about 'are they really a jerk or not?'. Rather, its about which behaviours will you encourage. And jerk-like behaviours are generally not to be encouraged.

Anyhoo -- TLDR: see flowchart (Shared by Blue <3)

 

[Blue]

This may be an unpopular sentiment, but:

This doesn't have to fall on the DM. While the game confers to the DM control over the campaign world, the adventures therein, and the rules themselves, this does not confer any special privilege in the hierarchy of the social group. The DM is just like everyone else.

While many people defer to the DM as the de facto "leader" of sorts even outside the context of the game, I think it is the responsibility of the entire group to sort out situations like this. The players should think twice before foisting this responsibility on the DM.

Me, personally, I have no problem telling someone what time it is whether I'm the DM or not. I would not, however, put it solely on my DM to deal with a social problem in the group. The DM isn't in control outside the context of the game.

I strongly agree with what you say. I'm often the DM, and I say that I only have any special role within the game, and that at the sufferance of the player. (If anyone has special rights, it's the host.)

That said, the DM can handle it with a simple "I don't want to run for you". A decision made within the context of the game.

I'm actually slightly conflicted, so I turn to how I've handled this in the past so I can examine my actions. My management training says praise publicly, criticize privately, and "first talking" to someone doesn't need to be shaming/accusing them in front of the entire group. I've had quiet words and asked them to mend their ways. If things continue, then it goes up to the group.

 

[TheSword]

My management training tells me they guys behavior falls into the downright dishonest. There is a breach of trust and confidence. I suggest suspension followed by summary dismissal for gross misconduct.

 

[Gardens & Goblins]

I strongly agree with what you say. I'm often the DM, and I say that I only have any special role within the game, and that at the sufferance of the player. (If anyone has special rights, it's the host.)

That said, the DM can handle it with a simple "I don't want to run for you". A decision made within the context of the game.

I'm actually slightly conflicted, so I turn to how I've handled this in the past so I can examine my actions. My management training says praise publicly, criticize privately, and "first talking" to someone doesn't need to be shaming/accusing them in front of the entire group. I've had quiet words and asked them to mend their ways. If things continue, then it goes up to the group.

More and more I find folks are afraid (yes, afraid, though specifically, afraid due to a lack of effective tools with which to use) of being perceived as being intolerant, not nice, the 'bad guy' in social situations, especially in small social groups.

I've dealt with a fair number of groups where, its clear a problem player is causing grief and when called on it, nobody other than the DM stands up to them.

While trying to understand others is admirable, and compassion is something we can always enjoy more of, failing to take action due to fear is simple weakness*. Emotional intelligence is nothing without courage.

Kindness is not weakness. Sadly, there are behaviours that take advantage of kindness and recognize that folks can be unwilling to be the, 'bad guy'. As you allude to, keeping the peace is the responsibility of everyone playing at the table - else they won't have a table to play at for very long.


*..I recall a discussion a few years back that, within the context of the last few decades, that the 'convenience' of being able to sanitize one's social interactions (Blocking folks on forums, ignoring texts/calls, avoiding digital environments.)has encouraged the inability to deal with confrontation. Many folks simply do not have the experience with taking a stand in social situations.