Mahiro Satsu said:I DM for one metagaming power-gaming stratagist freak-a-holic who never is satisfied with the campaign or me as DM. The rest are muchkins who show up inconsistantly at best. And yet when i ask him to help with some simple tasks to get the campaign up to the level we would like to operate at, he's like "what help you call people?"
I would kill for a fairly consistant and engaging group.
I’ll agree with this, to a point.
One thing you do not want is one player dictating all of the action at the expense of the rest of the party.
I had one player in my campaign that had a definite idea about what he wanted with his character, to heck with the rest of the group. He adamantly refused to compromise, literally going off on his own and leaving the rest of the group behind when he felt his agenda differed from theirs. We had a series of discussions about how player dynamics have to win over character ones (namely that the fun of the players is more important than character consistency and that character consistency should be adjusted if it wasn’t fun).
I tried heartily to explain that there was only one of me and if we do “his thing” all of the time the other players would be snoring in the corner; but in the end I don’t think he’ll be coming back to the table and I doubt the other players will miss him (had a fun character though).