DM's: Do you have one player in your group you'd like to give the boot?

[BeholderBurger]

In a word - yes.

 

[Engilbrand]

We all met at a gaming store. We got up to 9 players and 1 DM. 1 guy left for another game when we changed days. He has requested to return and we've ignored. He didn't really fit. 2 people scuba dive during the summer. They'll probably be back eventually. Another guy decided that he didn't like the roleplay of our group, complained and quit. Lawful guys don't tend to mix well with Chaotic groups. Go figure. The last guy was a douche. He created uncomfortableness (like that?) and we used a missed game as an excuse. We probably would have ditched him anyways. Dwarf, Craft (brewmaking), Cleric of Heironeous and Archivist are now all running jokes. You're not allowed to make anything related to these. Period. Our group now plays multiple times a week with nearly everyone running something. I even moved it to my new house. We differ in ages and who we are, but we have a lot of fun gaming together. It was pretty obvious after just a few sessions who would stay and who didn't mesh well.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Hmm. This thread (among others) has highlighted a trend.

Namely, not dealing with the situation until the group implodes. I've seen threads over the years in which one disruptive player results in the group disbanding.

Have DMs become so uncertain of themselves, so self-concious or so afraid of real world confrontation that rather than cowboy up and call the offender onto the carpet for his behavior that they would rather ignore or tolerate the behavior to the point that the group falls apart - all because of one disruptive player?

Avoidance is one of the most common forms of conflict resolution used. People optimistically tend to believe that a problem will get better or go away if they ignore it. Too often the result is that they do nothing until the just can't avoid it any longer, and then things go poorly because there is so much pent up emotion mixed into things.

 

[Merkuri]

I agree with what a few other people have said about avoiding the problem until the group breaks up. Very rarely do problems get better when ignored, they usually get worse. After all, if you see a player do something that bothers the rest of the group and you let him get away with it time and time again then it'll probably just grate on the group's nerves until things come violently to a head. If the DM (or another player) were to talk with the problem player right away you have a better chance of either fixing the behavior or parting on good terms.

I think the big problem is that there are many different styles of play in D&D, and while it's possible to group people together who like different things sometimes you'll get one person whose tastes so completely clash with the group as a whole that it makes things difficult. What makes it even more difficult is when the players are friends to begin with. Nobody wants to tell a good friend, "Look, you just don't like playing the game the same way we do, so we want to cut you out of this group activity you love and have been participating in for a while."

Another problem may be that many DMs lack the appropriate leadership skills to deal with problem group members. In this case, a game group is very similar to an office environment where you have one person in a position of leadership (the boss) and a group of people "under" them who have to work together to accomplish goals. The difference is that a DM is not usually chosen for his or her leadership ability, but rather their creativity, ability to ad-lib, organization skills, etc. Being a leader is not generally a requirement for being a good DM, even though the DM is often looked to for leadership of a gaming group. If you don't have good leadership skills then it's often easier to ignore a problem (player who clashes with the group) than to do something about it.

I think what can help sometimes would be to make up a policy beforehand about how people can be removed from the group, as in my earlier post about Hussar's policy. Having rules to point to when repremanding a player can make it easier. Coming up with such a set of rules may be tough with such a freeform game as D&D, but it's possible, and may help if you run into players whose playstyle just doens't mesh with the group or who are just plain troublemakers.

 

[Oryan77]

Yeah we have a problem player....but they can't kick me since I DM

 

[Morrus]

That's the "Friends before the Game mentality" that says that your friendship is more important than the game, therefore you have to endure the crap in order to maintain the friendship.

The friendship is more important than the game. Without a shadow of a doubt, and by a factor of ten.

The game is merely the social activity which a particular group of friends engages in together. Having the "authority" to excise a person from a group of friends is a unpleaant concept for me. If everyone, together, decides they don't want to associate with someone any longer, then that's one thing; having a single person who decides real life issues like who gets to comprise this social group as though they were an NPC is another thing entirely.

So, in my opinion, the whole group needs to make that decision, not an arbitrary "leader" with the power of social banishment.

 

[findar]

I find that if you don't put up with their antics they will usually quit without you giving them the boot.

But if you feel like someone is a problem, give them a warning first. That way your players will likely view you as fair compared to the problem player. It will help keep the game together while eliminating the problem.

 

[Darklone]

We had such a player. His best friend was in the group as well, so we couldn't boot him.... it was horrible.

Luckily for us he got tested at a job interview and was immediately sent into an insane asylum.

No, that's NOT a joke.

 

[kenobi65]

Do I have players that I wish would clean up some of their occasional behavior? Sure. (Then again, my players could probably say that about me, too.)

Do I have anyone who's so bad that I want to give 'em the boot? No. I don't game with people I wouldn't otherwise want to be friends with, at least, not for long.

 

[Dragonbait]

I've got two.
One guy shows up on time, and regularly, and knows the rules, but he has almost no attention span, starts to fall asleep at 9 o'clock, and is only happy playing the guy that deals the most damage. Yet! He wants to play a variety of characters, then complains about how weak his characters are.

One guy shows up about 50% of the time, loves to hear his own voice, and mopes for hours when his dice start rolling low numbers. Yet, he gets along well with the others, is a good roleplayer when not yakkin' OOC, and is willing to let others have the spotlight when he does finally stop talking.

Oddly enough, I find #2 to be more frustrating to me because of his motormouth... He should play a tinker gnome..