Kicking out a player: share your stories/advice

[DM_Jeff]

I wasn't going to post, but I see, among others, Teflon Billy has used both methods and they have worked, and so have I and I am the better for it.

While I mostly agree the upfront method is the best soloution, sometimes it's downright a waste of time. Point in case I've had two overegotistical players in the past 10 years who I have TRIED having "the talk" with, only to get involved in a giagantic "but, look, I'm so great and obviously such a super guy you are obviously mistaken" argument with. I'm not talking about avoiding a confrontation as much as putting up with massive BS from a guy who refuses to beleive he's flawed in any way and WON'T leave.

And for the other method, when we simply have no reason or need to see the person ever again, restart the group minus the player. No sneaking. If he finds out, who cares?

As a wise old friend once said: life is too short to be cajoling to troublesome, annoying people.

-DM Jeff

 

[DM-Rocco]

I really hate passive aggressive methods that "avoid" confrontation. I think that if you have to boot someone, have the cojones to do it privately, be honest with him and tell him exactly why. He doesn't have to like it, but he's going to have to accept it.

The idea of lying leaves a bad taste in my mouth. When they find out you lied to ditch them, it's even worse -- and if you don't tell them what they're doing wrong, they can't help improve it.

I agree with this. Not telling them the truth is like a girl breaking up with you but not telling you why. You always wonder what the hell happened. Er, or I guess you would

I only had to kick one guy out of my games before. He was your typical "short" agressive type with an axe to grind and for some reason was not just a jerk in the game but also insulted, on a frequent basis, the disposition of one of the other players weight.

He would always look for a fight in the game, never took prisioners, attacked on sight anything that moved, including good clerics and sleeping monsters with large CRs when the party wasn't ready, or high enough level. The players took that with a grain of salt, but when he started getting personal with real world insults that is when the other players said, "either he goes or we go."

You simple have to pull that player aside, just the two of you, and tell them it is not working. They might get cranky or insult you, but it is a cleaner resolution.

Think of it this way, would you rather that someone lied to you? Or would you rather have people tell you the truth.

 

[Flynn]

I vote for Honesty. It just works better, and it displays a higher level of personal integrity that helps you with your reputation.

Based on past experiences, I have implemented the following system with my gaming group for new gamers to help fight this kind of thing:

1. I (and maybe some of the others) meet with the new candidate first in a non-gaming setting, such as lunch at a fast food place, that kind of thing. If the new gamer seems okay, personality-wise, in terms of whether or not they click with me, then we can move on to the second phase.

2. I let on the mailing list and have them create a character, including background story. I provide the necessary house rules and campaign background, and encourage working with the existing players to build the character. Everyone gets to see whether the new gamer can/will work with others to fit in, and also gets a chance to review the final character to make sure it fits mechanically with the style of the game and the group. This also gives the new gamer their first chance to get to know the group as well.

3. Once the new gamer's got a character, then they come in for a session. In essence, they are treated as a guest shot, and I try to provide a good sample of the general gaming experience I offer. This lets the group see the new gamer in action, and the new gamer gets to see both the campaign and the other gamers in action.

4. At the end of the gaming session, I ask the new gamer if this is the kind of game they'd like to be in, and if this is the kind of group they'd like to be in. After all, the new gamer may have some concerns in regards to my DMing style, for example, or another player, etc. I let them know that they have a few days to think about it and get back to me, while I get the results of this "interview" from the other players.

5. Over the next few days, I discuss our gaming experience with the new gamer over private email with the current gamers. I ask them their impressions, and then I ask for a vote. It must be unanimous to be accepted. I usually don't have a problem with it, as most gamers are generally good gamers. Still, one vote against indicates a possible source of conflict between players in the future, and so I decide to nip that in the bud by not allowing the new player in. As I keep the results here anonymous, there is freedom for players to speak freely without reprisals, and the others won't know.

6. If this process leads to us not accepting the new gamer, I let them know, indicating that some games are not for everyone, that sometimes personalities do not get along, and that I have a responsibility to preserve the status quo of my current gamers in this event. I apologize for any problems this may have caused them, and I let them know that it isn't anything against them, just that, at this time, things just didn't work out with this particular combination of existing gamers and/or campaign styles.

Throughout this process, I reserve the right to vote "No" if the new guy rubs me the wrong way, because I'm part of the group, too. Also, my wife gets to vote "No" if someone is disrespectful to her or just gives her the creeps, even though she's not in the game, because it's her house, too, and frankly, I want my marriage to last longer than any campaign I run.

Even with this process in place, I've had to ask someone to leave before, and I did so directly using words very similar to step six, above. Sometimes this problems do not arise until after the game has continued for a bit, and in this particular case, I had to come to a decision for the good of the game. I apologized, but I made my choice based on what I thought was best. In my case, the gamer already knew that problems existed, and was considered leaving the game anyway, so it all worked out well for all involved. You might be surprised to find the same thing in your own case.

Good Luck,
Flynn

 

[Templeton580]

*

 

[Catavarie]

Tell the group at the end of a gaming session that you can't handle all the characters and have them all write a name on a sheet of paper and place it in the hat, miraculously that player's name will be the only one written and then you can burn the character sheet and tell them,
"The group has spoken, (player name) you are out of the game." Got to love the Survivor way of doing things.

Of course this also involves you getting together with the other players and planning it all in advance, but then again your obviously already talking behind their backs anyways.

 

[rgard]

One-on-one, DM-to-player, honesty. Maybe the guy won't be a tool in his next group if he knows what he's doing wrong.

That's funny...the kids in my store nick-named the problem player I posted about above, "The Tool."

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Hmmm, my last couple of groups have broken up. Now I'm wondering if they were just trying to get rid of me.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Hmmm, my last couple of groups have broken up. Now I'm wondering if they were just trying to get rid of me.

Definetly! You're such a burden to us all here, I'm sure you're no different in your games.

Just kidding, of course.

Groups do fall apart. As long as your gaming styles haven't clashed, and you always got along well with everyone, I don't think they kicked you out the sly way. And if they did, they weren't worth it.

 

[sniffles]

The restarting in secret method can be tricky, especially if other players in the campaign talk to the guy you're avoiding. If he finds out you've come up with a scheme to run things behind his back, he'll probably be more angry than if you just kicked him out.

Probably the best thing you could do is be completely honest, though he'll probably still hate you for kicking him out. It's not easy. I've put up with certain players for years because I didn't want to deal with banning them. Looking back, I think it would have been better to be honest.

Agreed. The "restart in secret" method has backfired on me recently. It's not a good way to treat people, even if you don't particularly like them. It's worse if you like the person and still want to be friends outside of the game in question.

Be a grown-up and talk to the person. Face to face, not over the phone or by email. What are you afraid of? Tears? So they cry. Curses? So what. Death threats? Call the police.

Give the person a chance to change, too. Don't just kick them out without an opportunity to change whatever it is that's bugging you. Unless you've already tried and you're confident this person can't change. But never assume that.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Be a grown-up and talk to the person. Face to face, not over the phone or by email. What are you afraid of?

That they'll kill you and take your stuff.

Seriuously I did play with one guy from whom that was a real concern. We tried to discuss the issues we were having in the game. During the conversation he seemed to be so unstable, we were honestly afraid of him snapping (I had once helped him move his large gun collection - I was really worried). We ended the disussion with no real resolution and then just stopped playing altogether. Six months later a new group formed with some of the same players and several new ones. We didn't hide the new group from him, but we also didn't invite him. Fortunately he really had no desire to game with us anymore, either.