D&D 5E Dealing with a trouble player and a major blow up

[Sacrosanct]

Bad people typically have three kinds of friends

1. other bad people who share the same bad beliefs (racists, extremists, etc)
2. people who think they will gain something from the friendship (they're rich, or they're one of the cool kids and if I hang with them I can be cool too, etc.) Something that was really obvious among kids and teens.
3. people who no one else with associate with. Bad people typically take advantage of this to the fullest.


*Edit* When I say "bad people", I don't mean 'people who have done bad things." We've acted like jerks at some point. I'm talking about consistently bad behavior as their normal personality.

 

[Celtavian]

How large a percentage of the group is six people? Can the groups continue without that people that might leave with Mr. Tantrum? I'm getting the feeling that Majoru is concerned that a bunch of Mr. Tantrum's friends might hamstring AL play at the store.

 

[Celtavian]

I'm not sure why you're so fanatically defending this problem player. I'll agree that MajorO isn't completely innocent in what has led up to this situation, but some of your comments are just plain odd.

Jerks can and often do have friends, they're often jerks themselves. Perhaps the store will lament the loss in business (if in fact those people were bringing any business in at all, which is not guaranteed). Perhaps the store will be relieved to be rid of them.

Even if MajorO's post is one-sided, it's the only side we've got and we're NOT going to get problem player's side of things. So asking for it is just silly. You can either believe what MajorO wrote or disregard it, but arguing on the basis of the numerous "what ifs" you keep bringing up is just senseless. If you don't want to believe what was written then continuing to speculate that it is false really serves no purpose as your speculations will never be validated.

Or maybe you just don't get it because you've never played with such a person before.

Fanatically defending?

I'm merely saying I understand this situation. You have two people that don't like each other. One has called the other stupid and he knows. Majoru presents himself as a guy that has a "stupid meter" and I translate that as Majoru as being somewhat judgmental. People that have "stupid meters" and judge people by them seem to have the attitude that their worldview and way of acting is superior to others. Very similar to those people you see that generally talk to people as if "They're in the know" concerning what is right and wrong with the world. I find that worldview creates many conflicts be it at game tables or the workplace.

I know tone of voice, expression, and other such things that Majoru may not even notice, but are expressed due to his feelings towards the player, may affect how this guy feels. I've seen this happen quite often. You may be able to suppress your words, but it is often far more difficult to suppress other forms of non-verbal communication that may influence reactions.

"What ifs" might allow Majoru to analyze his own behavior and think about how he would feel if he were the guy. How would Majoru feel if he was being DMed by a guy that called him stupid? Maybe Majoru should tell Mr. Tantrum he doesn't appreciate Mr. Tantrum always complaining at the table while he's DMing? Maybe have Mr. Tantrum ask himself if he would like someone complaining at the table while he DMs? What ifs are the best way to explore what is occurring and provide helpful advice. It encourages reflection and stepping into the other guy's shoes.

 

[the Jester]

How large a percentage of the group is six people? Can the groups continue without that people that might leave with Mr. Tantrum? I'm getting the feeling that Majoru is concerned that a bunch of Mr. Tantrum's friends might hamstring AL play at the store.

If he has to recruit additional DMs, going down 3 players isn't going to hamstring his in-store play. It will probably improve it by removing a disruptive element, despite the loss of a couple other players.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm going to reverse myself here and say that the problem is indeed Majoru's fault: Not because the player's actions were reasonable, but because Majoru chose to tolerate them and is still choosing to tolerate them.

Since it's now Wednesday, I assume the AL game in question has already happened. If you let the guy play and he behaved himself, okay. But the instant he acts up again, kick him to the curb. You're the AL organizer here, and the DM. You have a player who is creating trouble and making things unpleasant, not just for you, but for everyone else at the table. Giving him the boot is not merely your right but your duty.

Other folks are giving up their free time to come play in these AL games. The store is giving you space. You are letting them down if you allow this behavior to continue. What you do in the Sunday game is your own problem. I think it's stupid to keep playing with a bunch of toxic jerks who think they can walk all over you (and are evidently right), but whatever. But public play is another matter. If you take on the job of organizing AL, you are assuming a duty to the community and to prospective new players, and that should trump your own reluctance to rock the boat.

I think a quote from "The Stand" is appropriate here:

"For God’s sake, Larry... develop a little self-righteousness. A lot of that is an ugly thing, God knows, but a little applied over all your scruples is an absolute necessity! It is to the soul what a good sun-block is to the skin during the heat of the summer."

 

[JackOfAllTirades]

Fanatically defending?

I'm merely saying I understand this situation. You have two people that don't like each other. One has called the other stupid and he knows. Majoru presents himself as a guy that has a "stupid meter" and I translate that as Majoru as being somewhat judgmental. People that have "stupid meters" and judge people by them seem to have the attitude that their worldview and way of acting is superior to others. Very similar to those people you see that generally talk to people as if "They're in the know" concerning what is right and wrong with the world. I find that worldview creates many conflicts be it at game tables or the workplace.

I know tone of voice, expression, and other such things that Majoru may not even notice, but are expressed due to his feelings towards the player, may affect how this guy feels. I've seen this happen quite often. You may be able to suppress your words, but it is often far more difficult to suppress other forms of non-verbal communication that may influence reactions.

"What ifs" might allow Majoru to analyze his own behavior and think about how he would feel if he were the guy. How would Majoru feel if he was being DMed by a guy that called him stupid? Maybe Majoru should tell Mr. Tantrum he doesn't appreciate Mr. Tantrum always complaining at the table while he's DMing? Maybe have Mr. Tantrum ask himself if he would like someone complaining at the table while he DMs? What ifs are the best way to explore what is occurring and provide helpful advice. It encourages reflection and stepping into the other guy's shoes.

My irony meter is a smoldering ruin. Please tell me more about not being superior.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You can call me all the names in the book, and insult me all you want. And I'd probably leave. But I'd never leave my friends there to fend for themselves. Especially not my girlfriend, who I know you happen to have a crush on.

So this defense of this guy and his actions is just plain bizarre to me.

 

[steeldragons]

I would like to call [MENTION=5143]Majoru Oakheart[/MENTION] to attention...since there was supposed to be another session last night (Tuesday). I am sure I'm not the only one interested in hearing how things went...or didn't...or whatever.

Tell us what happened! <munches popcorn>

 

[JamesonCourage]

My irony meter is a smoldering ruin. Please tell me more about not being superior.

To be fair -and I think he'd agree with me on this- he does know best.

 

[Talmek]

I would like to call [MENTION=5143]Majoru Oakheart[/MENTION] to attention...since there was supposed to be another session last night (Tuesday). I am sure I'm not the only one interested in hearing how things went...or didn't...or whatever.

Tell us what happened! <munches popcorn>

I too am interested to see what happened in this week's episode...ahem...the ongoing drama...AHEM...man, I hope it worked out okay.

But seriously - I know that I've read a hundred threads about problematic players/GMs if I've read a single one. Does it seem that our hobby has more than it's fair share of "difficult" folks to anyone else out there in forum-land? I mean, I understand that as adults we're always going to find folks we'd rather not associate with but has the hobby become so small that we resign ourselves to playing with anyone we can find?

Someone once mentioned that "No D&D > Bad D&D" and I feel obligated to repeat that. Or maybe we should change rule zero from "The GM is always right" (unless he's not) to "Leave your drama at the door".

Just curious if maybe I'm the only one thinking this way.