Ever had a player get so bent out of shape over something small, then refused to play

[wingsandsword]

As for the original poster, the idea of playing baby dragons, freshly hatched, and there is no older dragon around at the moment of hatching is a classic one. The sample adventure in Counsil Of Wyrms begins that way. As for playing Gnolls, as was pointed out, now they are usually CE, and even the core rules say that other alignments are quite possible. They both sound like campaign concepts with promise. I know I'd be a little wondering about a whole campaign as gnolls (but it might be nice as a one-shot or miniseries), but I'd probably at least try it out.

I've been accused of being that type of player before. When the GM has never GM'ed before, never played the system in question, and decides to heavily house-rule the game to make it "make sense" to her (i.e. make it more like games she's played), and not write down any of her house rules until they come up figuring that we would just know them since the all "made sense", and the RAW "don't make sense", and the stock setting is highly altered because she likes things from popular movies, other game settings and popular books and just throws them in left and right.

When I took exception to this, she kept insisting that my concerns were minor and irrational, it's her game, she's being "creative", and I should sit down, shut up, and enjoy her story she's planned out (she intends to write a book of the events of the game, uh oh on that one, for a long list of reasons). Personally, I felt that the game was one huge bait & switch (I was called up and invited in being told it was just a game of suchandsuch system/settting, but after I create my character and get into the game, I find out how much she's changed everything and it's a horrible chimera of a system with suchandsuch at the core, on top of a hodgepodge of a setting based off of suchandsuch).

 

[billd91]

I'm going to do that tonight. I'm going to tell him the game is going to be played, with or without him.

I think that's what you have to do. He's exerting a veto over the game and that should only be reserved for serious, and I mean serious, breaches of personal preferences and not just because someone else wants to play a good gnoll.

 

[Sejs]

You are a sick man.

But amusing in a what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-you sort of way, so we let it slide.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Meh, I wouldn't want to play in those games either. And I would complain that no one wants to run a game that I would want to play in if those were the only options.

Then again, my way of dealing with that would be to either find a different bunch of gamers to hang out with, or to run my own game. (Which may have something to do with the fact that I have not played in more than four games in the last two years, only run games.)

For that matter I have met players who absolutely refuse to play in any game that includes gunpowder...

The Auld Grump

 

[RFisher]

I had a good friend walk out of a Warhammer FRP game I was running saying I was the worse GM ever. Of course, I wasn't very good then. (I may not be very good even now, & I was certainly worse at it then.) Plus, it was exacerbated by the fact that I naively thought "the more the merrier" & allowed the group to grow to 10 players. He eventually apologized.

I had another good friend who absolutely refused to try Ars Magica the moment he learned of the disparity between magi & other characters. He wouldn't even entertain the thought that they might have found a way to make it work.

But, in the grand scheme of my gaming life, such things have been pretty rare.

 

[reanjr]

You could try a PHB only campaign.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You are a sick man.

Is the messenger of disturbing messages a sick man, even if he endorses these messages? Now that I think of it: Yes, he is. So you're probably right with that. I often hear that I suffer from severe insanity. Personally, I think I rather enjoy it. Sanity is for those losers who can't even hear the Voices.

 

[MutieMoe]

The situation is like this: You set him up with girlfriend A but girlfriend A isn't acceptable and then girlfriend B comes along and she also isn't acceptable for another reason then it turns out she is a cyborg assassin from the future and girlfriend A is a ninja nurse and then the two of them start kissing and...

Uh, what was I talking about again?

On the actual topic, I have never had arguments about rules or campaign details that have gone so severe, I have had a hissy fit over last slice of bun when younger and really long and needlessly complicated argument over matter of ownership conserning a gaming book.
I would either suggest a talk with him and if it fails just getting rid of him, maybe he will pick up another hobby that's more fulfilling to him.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

That reminds me. We had one incident that could fit the bill:

We were a party of about 6 people. We were touring around the landscape when we saw about half a dozen enemies - I think it were some minor draconians. The wizard and the sorcerer/dragon disciple decide to throw a fireball each, and the dacos were toast. After the DM said they would get x-amount XP each, I asked whether it wouldn't be fairer all around if all party members shared in on the XP, since we're traveling as a team. While we hadn't dealt any damage, we are there to protect the spellcasters - and if it's going to be like that, that you get XP only if you dealt damage, I'd like to roll init to see if I can't drop one of the enemies with an arrow before the spellcasters started to torch'em.

Everyone agreed: The DM agreed, the other players agreed, the wizard agreed. But the Dragon Disciple's player didn't. He threw a fit like a child because now he got less XP.

He then startet to have his character talk bad about my character, to another PC. I rolled a listen check (ninja character, ranks in listen, wisdom - means good ears) and said that I probably heard that. He then threw another fit and said that I can't just roll dice without the DMs permission. The DM then said that I hadn't heard it.

The guy stopped showing up shortly thereafter, which was just as well, since I had my old swords prepared just for him: two ninja-to with some nasty poison to shove up his butt the moment he did anything suspecious to me.

That idiot could never keep player and character apart. He once played a female anti-paladin - and since this was during AD&D-times, her cha was quite high. Of course, the other evil characters would check her out all the time, and out of character we'd say things like "Anything suspicous in the area? No, than I stare at her a** some more."

Then, out of the blue, his character attacked my character. Without provocation (my character never said a thing, and as he walked behind her - usual place for a wizard isn't in front, she couldn't see anything). He didn't do it after all, after several people talked him out of it, but he did sicken me (with the cause disease ability). That campaign died before I could make my move, though. I had just waited for an opportunity to finish her off.

What a jerk.

 

[GQuail]

When I first read this thread, it just looked like a fussy player. BUt when you say he's the usual DM, that changes things.

I'm the default DM in my group, so when I do get to play, I can sometimes end up speaking a lot more than the other players because i'm still in the "I@m a GM and everyone will listen to me" mindset. There are game types and entire game systems I might not be keen on, but if the rest of the group wanted to play it, I'd etiher grin and bear it or bow out. I think throwing your weight around about how stupid it is until the players cancel the game, and then not being able to come up with anything better yourself, isn't very mature.

Hell, I'm forever telling my players that they're welcome to run one-offs or mini campaigns with us if they wanna try out GMing, and a couple have said tehy've got ideas theyd like tyo try out in the future. So what if I'm not a big Firefly fan and one guy wants to run a game set in the Firefly world? It would be his first shot at GMing and I think it's only fair to try to help him out and see what he's like. I certianly think that spitting the dummy out and bawling over a Good aligned Gnoll or a clutch of dragons without a parent (despite the fac thre MM says Gnolls are usually evil and epxlicitly states dragons sometimes abandon clutches of eggs) is a major over-reaction, and to keep bending to his will when everyone else is cool is only going to make things worse.

I'm interested to hear how talking to him goes. If he can't keep quiet and let the other guys run in peace, then he needs to find a new game. Ask him how he'd feel if you all started querying thing sduring his game and left disgusted over little stuff, crashing the game as you did so? What if you threw a wobbly becuase you though Universal Solvent was illogical because, if it melts everything, how do you store it? (A question my players kept asking despite getting in-game answers, which was starting to really grate. ;-) )