Arrgh! Mark!
First Post
Well, like many people it seems there comes a time when there's a player issue.
Let me explain. After finishing a successful WoT campaign (!?) which was our first successful complete campaign in about two years, due to another GM entering the picture and he being a beer-and-pretzels type of guy and I being too busy to really work on a complete campaign.
Well, after I finally mustered up the oompha to run a short WoT campaign (about 4 months worth), it was found by all that long campaigns with a modicum of versimilatude were as a rule to be more interesting than permanent one-shots or two-shots. So, more were required.
I raised the possibility of Midnight. Every person was interested, but one player had to skip the first session due to having his appendix removed. Having missed the first session, as much as I explained the world and issues the player simply didn't manage to pick up the idea of the campaign. Now, this particular player was more than vocal about being in a decent campaign for once.
When actually playing the game, he disrupts everyone, his character doesn't fit the party in any respect (It's a group of honour-driven resistance fighters, with him disrespecting every cultural item he comes across) and so on. He's playing a wild-man, but I'm finding it harder and harder to come to terms with his character being so at odds with the party and the parties goals.
An example is along the lines of this; I'm attempting to show a subtle difference between clan-dwarf and kurgan-dwarf (Underground and Hill, basically) and the slow, emotionally cripped death that they long for.
The character was raised from the age of 12 by dwarves, mind you.
So when a dwarf patiently explains a practice of honoring the dead (To another PC's question), the player shrugs and curses all dwarves for being fat and weak. Even PC's have warned the character of his impending death by their own hands.
However, every other player have mentioned their approval for the game and the style I'm running it in. (Lots of roleplaying and problem-solving through diplomacy. Or aggressive diplomacy and the termination of hostilities, at least.)
I've asked the player about this, and his answer goes along the lines of because he doesn't know a lot about the setting (As if anyone else does, mind you) he's playing a wild man who obeys no law, and doing whatever he wants is by my own rules (Roleplay what your character would do) admissable. He says he is unsure about his character, though, and might change it. I'm uncertain whether this would really help things.
I don't want to kick him out - he's been in my group for five years now. Any clues on how to deal with this?
Let me explain. After finishing a successful WoT campaign (!?) which was our first successful complete campaign in about two years, due to another GM entering the picture and he being a beer-and-pretzels type of guy and I being too busy to really work on a complete campaign.
Well, after I finally mustered up the oompha to run a short WoT campaign (about 4 months worth), it was found by all that long campaigns with a modicum of versimilatude were as a rule to be more interesting than permanent one-shots or two-shots. So, more were required.
I raised the possibility of Midnight. Every person was interested, but one player had to skip the first session due to having his appendix removed. Having missed the first session, as much as I explained the world and issues the player simply didn't manage to pick up the idea of the campaign. Now, this particular player was more than vocal about being in a decent campaign for once.
When actually playing the game, he disrupts everyone, his character doesn't fit the party in any respect (It's a group of honour-driven resistance fighters, with him disrespecting every cultural item he comes across) and so on. He's playing a wild-man, but I'm finding it harder and harder to come to terms with his character being so at odds with the party and the parties goals.
An example is along the lines of this; I'm attempting to show a subtle difference between clan-dwarf and kurgan-dwarf (Underground and Hill, basically) and the slow, emotionally cripped death that they long for.
The character was raised from the age of 12 by dwarves, mind you.
So when a dwarf patiently explains a practice of honoring the dead (To another PC's question), the player shrugs and curses all dwarves for being fat and weak. Even PC's have warned the character of his impending death by their own hands.
However, every other player have mentioned their approval for the game and the style I'm running it in. (Lots of roleplaying and problem-solving through diplomacy. Or aggressive diplomacy and the termination of hostilities, at least.)
I've asked the player about this, and his answer goes along the lines of because he doesn't know a lot about the setting (As if anyone else does, mind you) he's playing a wild man who obeys no law, and doing whatever he wants is by my own rules (Roleplay what your character would do) admissable. He says he is unsure about his character, though, and might change it. I'm uncertain whether this would really help things.
I don't want to kick him out - he's been in my group for five years now. Any clues on how to deal with this?
