How Do you have an adult conversation?

[Scott Christian]

This sounds like an odd question.

I think everyone knows context matters, and even more so, the individuals involved matter more.

Positioning, spacing, social relationship, hell, even social status matters.

This is a question no one can answer except the two people involved. (And even then, one of them (or both of them) might get it wrong.

 

[GrimCo]

Sure, but it's important to define what constitutes a problem player, which will differ from GM to GM. This is why I think a session zero written document is the best way to convey your expectations for player behavior. As a number have people have said, you can't cover everything, but it should cat least cover the most egregious behaviors. IMO, it's certainly better that not providing any guidelines and blindsiding someone.

Do we need to? I mean, we are talking about grown up people here. There is some baseline expectations of acceptable behaviors baked in when engaging in play with other people. Kindergarten kids learn them real fast without to much communicating and written documents. Be fair, follow the agreed rules, take turns, treat others with respect, be honest, and handle winning or losing gracefully. When you don't like to share toys on the playground, you find out real fast that other kids don't wont to play with you no more. Same principles apply here.

And this thread assumes that GMs are the reasonable ones, but that's not always the case.

Or that GM is one that's supposed to be mediator. There are problem DMs, there are problems between players they should take care between them.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Or that GM is one that's supposed to be mediator. There are problem DMs, there are problems between players they should take care between them.

There's two problems that come up here, and they interrelate:

1. Problems between two players don't stay there in many cases. Over time they're pretty likely to splash off on the group as a whole.

2. Not only are some people very confrontation-averse (they'll just sit and put up with aggravation rather than deal with it--and no, that does not mean it will not have any impact on them, and potentially the game just because they, on some level, have not chosen to deal with it), but there are plenty that have been taught that this sort of thing is part of the GM's bailiwick, and thus will wait for them to address it.

 

[cranberry]

Do we need to? I mean, we are talking about grown up people here. There is some baseline expectations of acceptable behaviors baked in when engaging in play with other people. Kindergarten kids learn them real fast without to much communicating and written documents. Be fair, follow the agreed rules, take turns, treat others with respect, be honest, and handle winning or losing gracefully. When you don't like to share toys on the playground, you find out real fast that other kids don't wont to play with you no more. Same principles apply here.

I agree that we shouldn't have to, and most adults understand basic acceptable behavior. But just in case, a written document can't hurt for the rare exception.

There are a number of people here claiming that bad behavior is rampant, and that a written document isn't enough. That's what I'm pushing back on.

 

[Artamo]

There are a number of people here claiming that bad behavior is rampant, and that a written document isn't enough. That's what I'm pushing back on.

“Rampant.” I haven’t seen anyone else use that word. I’ve seen people say it can and does happen.

 

[bloodtide]

It does depend a LOT on what the problem is that you want to address.

The best way is to just remove the player from the game, if that is possible.

If the player is doing something in the game, a great way is to just alter the game around them.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I'm getting to be an old man, and I've gamed with a lot of different people over the last 38 years. In the grand scheme of things, I've run into relatively few bad people when gaming. Gamers are pretty decent people for the most part.

I was responding to one particular comment.

I run into very few "problem" gamers myself, and usually they are teenagers.

Gamers that annoy me, sure? LOTS of those. But only because we have different personalities/preferences. Not because they are problems.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

I'm of the opinion that an "adult conversation" doesn't really get more specific than "no one does anything I consider immature" but maturity is just measuring approval by the person saying it.

I think a lot of the people that say it kind of expect that the outcome will be obvious from each person being hemmed in by the need to act in a mature way. But I think that they actually have very different expectations for what outcome should be inevitable.

I know people for whom an adult conversation is just a conversation where the person asking someone else to change a behavior is reminded they aren't entitled to control someone else's behavior and they think that's the solution, and I know other people for whom an adult conversation means taking responsibility for not doing things that hurt others or stress out other members of the group, and that you can't be mature while saying no to change.

I know people for whom it means that you prioritize the group staying together over everything. I know other people for whom an adult conversation means that two people escalate and the first person to get heated loses even if the other person isn't being especially reasonable.

I kind of think the goal of saying it is to avoid interrogating what it means because the internet usually can't agree on who is actually obligated to do what.

 

[SteveC]

I think this is a really good question, but it's also so far outside of the skillset that most people have, that it takes a lot of effort.

The thing I would recommend most is reading management books (okay, subscribe to a management YouTuber or TikTok ... whatever they are in 2026).

I will give you what I have used in the past. During the session, you have to manage things to keep a problem player under wraps. That means using transitions and seques away from problematic stuff, and calm refocusing to keep things civil at the very least. If that can't happen, time for a break in the session!

I would talk to someone personally, one-on-one in a relaxed atmosphere. Like over lunch. And then say "hey, you seemed to be under some stress in the game, what's going on?" And then listen.

The example I have used on these very boards is where a player was cheating. It got the rest of the group really annoyed so I had to deal with it. It turns out he had a world of complicated problems going on (some serious stuff) and just couldn't handle failing in the game too. So we talked about that, and I helped him with those issues where I could. And he cheated much less.

I told the group "Bob is going through a rough patch, and I think that's why this is going on." And they were okay with it. And they were supportive of Bob (and that wasn't his name...)

Each situation is different, but it starts with a conversation. Is the person neurodivergent? If so, is there some calming technique they can use? Can I present the game differently to be more direct?

If the person is just being a jerk, and you can't decide on a reason for it, it's time to ask, "Are you having fun? Is this game really for you?" And maybe a mutual disconnect is the only thing to handle it.

But listening, coaching, and adjusting what you can to accommodate different needs is the key.