Banning a Player from my Group. Am I Justified?

[delericho]

You absolutely have the right to not game with anyone you choose, for any reason you want (or even for no reason at all).

I probably wouldn't have handled that situation as you described (basically, I wouldn't have changed the first tumble to withdrawal, and so skipped much of that issue). Nor am I 100% certain I'd be looking at booting this player at this time.

However, I most certainly be putting this player on notice at this point that he's definately on thin ice. Furthermore, I would be stating that he has to learn the 3.5 rules at this stage. With books available for him to borrow, or just the SRD available online, there is no excuse for not learning the rules.

 

[billd91]

If he's not willing to crack a book on 3E, then he shouldn't be in a 3E game. And it sounds like he's disruptive to boot. Get rid of him.

 

[Hjorimir]

If he is a friend of yours, I'd start by having a heart-to-heart conversation...away from the others and not on a game day. Just spell out what you're feeling and seeing...and let him do the same.

See if you can find a resolution. If not, be mature and agree to disagree and have him leave the game.

That's my 2 coppers.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Looking at this, I see 2 keys:

One of the players in my current game has not been happy with the edition I’m running. He used to play 2ed with me back in high school (15 or so years ago). I started gaming again a year ago and began a campaign using the 3.5ed rules. This player refuses to get or read anything from the 3.5ed player’s handbook (often complaining that he still has his perfectly good 2ed player’s guide on his shelf at home.) Over the last several sessions he’s made me really angry because he always stops the game to arguing about rules he doesn’t understand. Though he likes to argue, he refuses to read anything about the edition we are playing.

and

I really don’t look forward to sessions with this player anymore and a hobby that used to be fun has become a horrible chore.

You made the first error- you shouldn't have let him play in the 3.5 game if he wasn't willing to learn the 3.5 rules. Like 3 people playing Monopoly while (simultaneously on the same board) one player is using Pachisi rules, this was destined to cause problems.

The resultant friction has caused the latter feeling to arise in you (and possibly the other players as well).

I'd try to talk this one out, but be clear and adamant- to play in your current campaign requires a working knowlege of 3.5 D&D.

If you can't sit down with this guy and get him to play the game by the rules, don't let him play. If you still otherwise enjoy this person's company, find some other social activity you can share...even if its a 2Ed game run by him or someone else.

I'm speaking from experience, BTW. I've got a buddy I've gamed with since 1984 or so. It took him a few years to try 3.0, and he still won't play any RPG but D&D...not even the mechanically similar D20 Modern Fantasy or another classic FRPG will gain his approval. As a result, I (and other GMs in the current game group) have to decide whether an RPG campaign idea I'd like to run is a D&D idea or not because that decision will perforce include or exclude him.

I'd rather have him at the table than not, but he's an adult. He can choose to join us or not, and if not, engage in something else he enjoys, like poker or hanging out with his baby boy.

 

[Tewligan]

Wait a minute - he was in high school 15 years ago? So, he's a grown man in his 30's acting like a whiny little 8-year-old? Oh my god, I couldn't get that ass out of my game fast enough if I were in your shoes.

 

[Bacris]

Wait a minute - he was in high school 15 years ago? So, he's a grown man in his 30's acting like a whiny little 8-year-old? Oh my god, I couldn't get that ass out of my game fast enough if I were in your shoes.

/second

My DM had to ask a teen to leave the group for similar behavior - although his was more munchkinism and constant DM-undermining / rules-sabotaging... But for a grown adult to act this way? Yeah, let him go find a 2nd Ed group They can still be found and it won't disrupt your game.

 

[Jhaelen]

This player refuses to get or read anything from the 3.5ed player’s handbook (often complaining that he still has his perfectly good 2ed player’s guide on his shelf at home.)

Well, did you point out to him, that D&D3.5 has just about NOTHING in common with AD&D except some fluff?
I'd also like to mention that it is somewhat understandable that he doesn't want to get the 3.5 PHB. Most of my current players didn't want to when I started my campaign. They wanted to be sure first, they'd like the new edition and the game round had a future.

So what I did was to hand out a concise summary of the most important combat rules and point them to a nicely formatted version of the SRD. I also helped each of them individually to create their characters.
The first couple of sessions were really slow because no one had a firm grasp of the rules. During play I would often explain why I did certain things, pointing out situations that would allow AOOs etc.

Two years later all of them have bought one or more of the supplements besides the PHB; one of them has even bought everything available for 3.5 except the adventures.

The one most important thing you should tell your problem player is that you will not tolerate rule discussions like the one you described during the game. If everyone but him knows for certain that actions are (or are not) possible then there's no reason to waste time discussing them. You should take the time, though, to explain your actions. Encourage the other players to do this, too.
Assuming the problem player is principally willing to learn the rules at his own time, he should be able to integrate after a while.

Of course, as others have already pointed out, only you can decide if it's worth the effort to you. If you'd rather he didn't continue playing, tell him you expect him to read and learn the rules or he's out.
Heck, you cannot play ANY kind of game with someone who isn't willing to learn the game's rules - so if that's the case here, there's not even a question.

 

[Elephant]

Are you justified? Absolutely. He shouldn't be playing a 3.5e game if he doesn't want to play by - or even learn - the 3.5e rules.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

Send him off, calmly and maturely explain why, and then feel free to do any one of these to his character once the player leaves. All signs point to this fellow being an active obstacle to your campaign.

If you're more about irony, sort out the character in a way that is conducive to the TSR-era D&D he clings to at all costs.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

If he is a friend of yours, I'd start by having a heart-to-heart conversation...

Yeah, maybe the two of them can go shopping for shoes or skirts or something.

Since when do grown men settle their gaming differences by having a private heart to heart?

Just tell him (a) you're the DM, (b) he's acting like a prick and (c) he's getting the boot.

Man up!