Problem Player Woes

[Vyvyan Basterd]

In Magic: the Gathering terms, John sounds like a Johnny.

Timmy, Johnny and Spike

Nah, even us Johnnies want our combo to go off as quick as possible. Three rounds just to trip an orc? No freakin' way.

 

[Rekka360]

I would have kicked him by now, if he's draining all the fun out of it then he needs to go. What is the point of playing D&D? To have fun, if he's making everyone miserable, then you've lost the fun.

I understand it's hard because he's your friend but...aren't they other players your friends too?

 

[BlackMoria]

I am always forthright and up front with my players (I am the DM). If there is antisocial behavior or immaturity going on, I stop things right then and there and the offending player and myself go into another room for a 'consultation'

I never run a player down by calling him a jackhole or whatever. I simply ask what his/her issue is, why they are doing the behavior they are doing and try to resolve the issue by addressing the concerns of the player if there is some merit to the issue or tell the player that that the behavior is unacceptable if the reason for the behavior has no merit and what action I will undertake if the behavior continues.

The ball is now in the player's court. He either conforms to the table rules on conduct or he suffers the consequences for non-compliance.

In thirty five years of playing, I only twice had to escort a person to the door and bid him a goodnight, with a statement that he is welcome back to play but only under the terms discussed.

One player didn't return. The other return and apologized to the table and was accepted back.

 

[InVinoVeritas]

Nah, even us Johnnies want our combo to go off as quick as possible. Three rounds just to trip an orc? No freakin' way.

Yeah, seriously. You get Improved Trip and a whip. Then you don't have to get within striking range. And you can trip that orc every round, whenever you want.

Or, heck, spread a rope across the campsite before you go to sleep. Then, when ambushed, you can cast Animate Rope and bind your attacker before you even get out of bed.

Good clever tactics is all about setting the stage before it's needed. Bad tactics is all about wasting everybody's time--yours, your teammates', and even your opponents'.

 

[Haltherrion]

To be honest, I really would advise against this sort of approach, for a few reasons. IME, tiered XP systems, where you reward certain styles of play and punish others, has a strong tendency to backfire. Instead of enforcing desired behaviors, it merely punishes and adds an air of favoritism to the affair. It lets the problem player feel persecuted, which can actually REINFORCE their bad behaviors as a passive-aggressive form of protest.

I agree this is a heavy hammer to use and a problemmatic one but if the referee really doesn't like the behavior and is not willing to eject the player, I think the referee needs to try something and tiered XP awards will alter behavior.

Something needs to give. A referee tolerating disruption without doing something about it is likely to result in less available players and eventually players quitting as well.

The simplest solution at this point is to ask the player to leave but the OP seems reluctant to do that. Talking to the player seems to have failed as well.

 

[Izmo]

If anyone's interested, here's the update, in a nutshell:

Before the next game session, I met up with John and talked to him about what was going on with the game. He responded very politely, and wanted to talk to the rest of the group about all of this.

We got together, and had a long talk about things. He explained his motivations behind some things, reminded us of some things (for instance, no one remembered that he was throwing weapons at the Xill, and that he himself was at 3 or so hit points), and apologized for a lot of things. The big thing that came up however, was that John was hurt that none of the players confronted him about a lot of their issues. This was a reality check, and really put a lot of things into perspective. After all was said and done, the group thought it was best to give John another chance, and his new character is definitely working out, and the group's already started to joke about some of the things that came out of the conversation.

So all in all a very positive experience in the end, and all of us realized how we helped create such a tense situation. I again want to thank everyone here for all the help and input.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Great to hear! Congrats on working it out to keep everyone together.

 

[Raven Crowking]

So why do the other characters hang out with him?

Not the PLAYERS, the CHARACTERS?

This is what I keep wondering.

Were I a player in this group, I would feel able to handle the challenge. And role-play at the same time. To wit:

Situation: Sir Hidesalot avoids combat while group battles foes.

Response: "Don't fear these orcs....Fear me! For if ever you stand still while we fight for our lives again, you will learn that you haven't avoided all danger."

---

Situation: Sir Hidesalot makes jokes about slaying party.

Response: (With a cold look.) "Best be able to make good on your boasts, friend, ere they pass your lips again."

---

Then just follow through. Actual in-game group dynamics should take care of the rest. Either he will shape up, or he will quit the group on his own accord. Add an NPC to the group for just this purpose if you like. And if you find yourselves having to follow through repeatedly, and he is unable to learn from experience, then you have to let him go.

So, my advice is: If he is your friend, try retraining the player. Talk to the other players about how to do this. If it doesn't work, make your friendship about something other than gaming, and game with other people.


RC


EDIT: D'oh! Too late!

 

[Beginning of the End]

(1) Talk to him about it.

(2) Minimize his negative impact on other people's play. (Put him on a timer, for example, so he can't hog table time by waffling.)

(3) Kick him.

 

[amerigoV]

To be honest, I really would advise against this sort of approach, for a few reasons. IME, tiered XP systems, where you reward certain styles of play and punish others, has a strong tendency to backfire. Instead of enforcing desired behaviors, it merely punishes and adds an air of favoritism to the affair. It lets the problem player feel persecuted, which can actually REINFORCE their bad behaviors as a passive-aggressive form of protest.

Worse, this puts a burden on the rest of the party to have to accommodate a system that is solely to punish one player. Beyond that, it creates an air of competition. A player might have a great session and then not get the bonus and wonder "Didn't I roleplay well? Why did I only get normal XP?" and can actually have a damaging effect on existing good players.

I fully agree here. Adding a problem to fix a problem will just create more issues.


In the Real World, my wife ran into a situation like this at work in a small office. There was one person that was creating issues. Instead of addressing that person directly, the office manager chickened out by making everyone in the office take a personality test so they could figure out "how to work with each other given their different personalities." It did not fix the problem, but I did get some insight into my wife's personality (which at work had some aspects I did not see at home).

Its a game. Handle it directly and maturely. Otherwise, you will start to lose other players (I'll take XBOX over a crapping gaming group any day).