Players who think your game is Survivor the RPG

[Nifft]

Kill them both. It's important to make an example of problem players before the rest of the herd -- er, group -- gets out of hand.

-- N

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Kill them both. It's important to make an example of problem players before the rest of the herd -- er, group -- gets out of hand.

-- N

No no. You had it right the first time.

Herd.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Our group had this happen once, but it was a bit less acrimonious. (Mostly because the person who left for a while was mature about it and didn't phrase it as an ultimatum.)

See, one of the people we used to play with was a girl with a lot of deep personal problems and a tremendous fondness for drama. When she was in the right mood, she was a fine player, and everyone could have fun. The problem was that she wasn't in the right mood more than once out of every ten sessions; the rest of the time, she was sullen and withdrawn, refusing to participate, refusing to let other PCs draw her character into whatever was going on in the game, and at her worst, endlessly complaining about the game itself.

This got worse over time, of course, and eventually we got rid of her. Somewhere in the middle of that ordeal, though, the wife of our usual GM opted out of playing in any group that included the sullen girl. (She has an admirably low tolerance for self-pitying bullsh-t and wasn't interested in putting up with it from the sullen girl any longer, and anyway, she wasn't terribly interested in the next game we were playing.)

Which was a fairly classy way of handling it. Our GM's wife didn't say "it's her or me," she just looked at the situation and said "Hey, I'm not going to have fun when the sulky girl is there, so I'll just come back after she's gone." Because, after all, she knew that eventually even the most serene-tempered of us would be sick of the sulky girl's drama, and she'd leave the group to go deliberately alienate other people.

--
which she did, so now our group's doing fine again
ryan

 

[dreaded_beast]

In my opinion, if you are not having fun, then why stick around? You are investing time to play a game that is supposed to be fun and enjoyable, but if the group you are in is not fun for you, then there is no sense to stick around. I've already lived the experience of gaming with a group for a few years where the game itself was fun, but whatever fun the game held was sucked away by personality conflicts with the other players and DM.

 

[pogre]

I used to run a game for a bunch of guys who were cooks and bouncers in a bar down in St. Louis. The game started after 2 AM when the bar shut down and went all night. Guys would bring goodies from the kitchen like fried ravioli, chicken wings, and also a ton of beer. Things went really well until one time there was a "discussion" about some magical treasure in my fairly low-magic world. It turned into an all out fight with one player throwing a case of beer at another player chipping his tooth. I almost called the cops to break the whole thing up.

You know what? The next week we played and everybody was great and enjoying the game. Looking back I think that explosive moment let people vent and saved one of the most enjoyable campaigns I have ever run. Sometimes being above board with your problems can cut off tensions down the road. Of course, I am not advocating throwing cases of liquor at anybody's head

 

[rounser]

This is over an in-character dispute? Wow, what an over-reaction.

True...although...

I don't think unconcious parts of our brains are equipped to distinguish emotionally between "he did it to me" and "his character did it to me" without concentrating conciously and trying to overrule the emotional reaction...in much the same way that they can't tell the difference between visualisation and actually doing something...and in reference to games in particular, that I've heard rumours of people breaking up relationships and friendships over games of Diplomacy (betrayal in a game being commensurate with betrayal in the real world apparently).

It's a vaguely interesting topic though; is in-character bullying acceptable, because it's in the context of a game?

 

[d4]

and in reference to games in particular, that I've heard rumours of people breaking up relationships and friendships over games of Diplomacy (betrayal in a game being commensurate with betrayal in the real world apparently).

i don't think i've seen anything that extreme, but i have seen friendships become... strained... over games of Diplomacy. and i had another friend who refused to play Diplomacy again because (in his words) he "wanted to remain friends" with us.

i think you are right that most people think (at an unconscious level): "he's screwing with me in this context == he'll screw me over in all contexts."

i know i can fall into that thinking easily enough. when i roleplay, my characters are either very much like me in personality or someone whose behavior is more admirable than my own -- more honest, more honorable, more "good" for lack of a better term. people who roleplay to "explore their dark side" or play amoral or immoral characters confuse me, because i have a hard time separating their in-game behavior from themselves.

 

[bubbalin]

...and in reference to games in particular, that I've heard rumours of people breaking up relationships and friendships over games of Diplomacy (betrayal in a game being commensurate with betrayal in the real world apparently).

I don't much play diplomacy anymore because of this. I too get upset. In fact, the last time I screwed another player over in character in an online gam, I made sure I messaged him and told him it wasn't personal...

 

[Thanee]

Well, if people take the game too serious, they should rather spend their time in a more (to them) enjoyable fashion.

Bye
Thanee

 

[rounser]

i don't think i've seen anything that extreme, but i have seen friendships become... strained... over games of Diplomacy. and i had another friend who refused to play Diplomacy again because (in his words) he "wanted to remain friends" with us.

Yeah, I'd assume in the case of those rumours that it was just a flashpoint for a relationship that was on shaky ground anyway. The game is a confronting interaction with others that we're not used to, in that there's no dice to blame for bad luck; it forces the situation that someone has to make the decision to betray you, or vice versa, in order to play...in fact, it could probably be quite happily renamed "Betrayal", although I doubt it would sell as well.

i think you are right that most people think (at an unconscious level): "he's screwing with me in this context == he'll screw me over in all contexts."

Yes, I think you're right that that's probably the subconcious emotional arithmetic going on. Conjecture on my part, but perhaps people are particularly emotionally touchy about betrayal because the repercussions in real life are often high stakes for someone to bother to betray you (and risk the relationship) in the first place...so we take it quite personally (and perhaps irrationally if it's just a simulation) from people close to us.

i know i can fall into that thinking easily enough. when i roleplay, my characters are either very much like me in personality or someone whose behavior is more admirable than my own -- more honest, more honorable, more "good" for lack of a better term. people who roleplay to "explore their dark side" or play amoral or immoral characters confuse me, because i have a hard time separating their in-game behavior from themselves.

It seems to me that the player who is the subject of this thread is the same - he's obviously taken it personally. If he were able to save face somehow (perhaps a genuine in-character apology from the insulting character) and there were no repeat performance of cursing at fellow PCs, then the problem might all disappear in a puff of smoke...