When someone plays something you don't like

[Rechan]

Have you ever been in a game where one of the players is running a class or a race that gets on your nerves? Or that, for whatever reason, you think it's boring, has stupid fluff, stupid powers, or is otherwise just lame.

We're not talking about mechanics. We're not talking about ability combos that ruin the fun. Nothing that you would ban or curtail because it's overpowered. Nor are we talking about something that breaks the tone of the genre for you (say, psionics in fantasy).

I speak purely from a perspective of taste. For whatever reason, you don't like that class or that race. And your player - for whatever reason - wants to play it, and plays it all the time, and you just don't like it.

To use an example, let's take the bard. Some just find them ridiculous, and do not see a guy with a lute having a place in an adventuring party.

Have you been in that situation? And, what'd you do? How do you handle this situation?

In my experience, and as others have said on these boards, players don't like you banning something just because you don't like it conceptually; it comes off as arbitrary and mean. At the same time, just "sucking it up" would be letting someone have their fun at the expense of yours.

And, for the sake of conversation, let's assume I'm not talking about some off-the-wall race or class from a splat book three times removed from the core rules, or a completely different campaign setting/system/whathaveyou. Thus saying "It's not core" as an excuse to dismiss it is not on the table.

I make this post as a DM, but it is also a fair question for a player; when someone at the table plays something that annoys you.

 

[Cadfan]

In my experience, and as others have said on these boards, players don't like you banning something just because you don't like it conceptually; it comes off as arbitrary and mean. At the same time, just "sucking it up" would be letting someone have their fun at the expense of yours.

The short answer is that I don't have things I dislike conceptually to such a great extent that I cannot have fun while someone else plays them.

The long answer is that I do have things I really dislike in terms of flavor, but I consider "live and let live" in these regards to be part of being a mature adult. So I let them be.

The really long answer would involve a discussion about flavor that influences behavior, and behavior that's bad for the game. It would probably involve a discussion of kender, and why I don't allow people to play characters who steal from or murder their party members.

But when its just something like half orcs, I live and let live.

 

[Mallus]

Have you been in that situation?

Sure!

And, what'd you do?

I try to be gracious. People enjoy the game each in their own way. Besides, my enjoyment shouldn't be so dependent on the other players sharing my exact tastes. Besides, graciousness is nice.

How do you handle this situation?

Did I mention I try to be gracious?

In more practical terms, if a real conflict developed at the table, I'd talk things over with the group, make it clear that I'm cool with other people's predilections so long I get some time to indulge mine. I don't need control over the campaign's tone, just a little spotlight time for the things I enjoy.

 

[hong]

I just ban stuff.

IME, ppl rarely complain if you ban stuff because you have an aesthetic dislike of it. Tastes vary, and as DM it's usually accepted that you have some scope to vary the parameters of the game to your liking. You may have some players who refuse to play anything other than what you've banned, but these players probably aren't the best type to have in your game anyway.

However, trying to justify your aesthetic dislike using specious or incomplete reasoning ("halflings are b0rken!"/"Magic items don't fit in a low-magic game!"/etc) can get ppl's backs up.

Naturally, you still want to leave as much space open for ppl to play in as possible. But noone is going to take away my god-given right to ban halflings. And dwarves. And gnomes. And, in fact, anything under 5 feet tall.

 

[Obryn]

The long answer is that I do have things I really dislike in terms of flavor, but I consider "live and let live" in these regards to be part of being a mature adult. So I let them be.

Yup, this.

-O

 

[Greg K]

What Hong wrote although I would only ban dwarves, gnomes, and halflings based upon a particular setting I was trying to run.

As a player, I once walked out on a game with a new group, because of their characters. Everyone was playing characters with magic items and abilities modeled off of comic book superheroes in a DND environment (e.g., one player was a barbarian with wolverine claws and ring of regeneration, another had a magic ring which granted Green Lantern like powers). They were having fun so more power to them, but to me it was lame (if I want to play comic book superheroes, I have games designed for that). so I left.

 

[Starbuck_II]

To use an example, let's take the bard. Some just find them ridiculous, and do not see a guy with a lute having a place in an adventuring party.

Have you been in that situation? And, what'd you do? How do you handle this situation?

I'd ask them to play a different music than Lute if that is the problem.

Be unique like tap dance, weapon drills (Complete Warrior gave that skill), Beat box, rap, tango, jokes, whistle, etc.

But I usually have no issue.

Then again, I play Badass Bards giving everyone +12 to hit/damage by level 10. No one complains about Bards then.

 

[hong]

For me at least, it helps to beable to ask the player "player, can you give me an example from a book or movie or TV show of what your character is like?" A concrete visual can be useful to get over the imaginative block, thus reducing the need to ban stuff unnecessarily. Although banning stuff is always good.

Of course, it's necessary that the player can use a book/movie/TV show that you consider a relevant source of inspiration to the game. So, if they want to play Wolverine or Green Lantern (to use the example given above), there might indeed be an existing source of inspiration but it won't help their cause. And on your part, this creates an obligation to tell them what sorts of themes or existing materials are informing your vision of the game.

It's a good idea to get this sort of communication going regardless, really.

 

[Dragonbait]

<original post removed by poster because it unintentionally looked like a thread derailer>

I try to let them play what they want. Different people enjoy the game in different ways. I actually get more annoyed at players who have very strong (and typically very limiting) opinions on what and how people should play. I have only walked away from a few games because of very off-the-wall silly characters.

 

[hong]

Has anyone found that they have to say "NO!" or strongly dislike the character concepts of one particular player more often than others?

I know as a GM there is one player who will regularly try to outdo other characters. Sometimes its just a skill, sometimes its something larger like class abilities. This player will be the kind who wants to be a power-nullifier and power duplicator, and sees nothing wrong when he nullifies another player's powers then imitates the nullified power himself.

As a player I knew someone who would regularly make ridiculous characters. I'm not talking about things like a talking duck ridiculous. I'm talking about a miniature Abe Lincoln who uses martini as a weapon in a non-silly Dungeons and Dragons game. Or a Indiana Jones-type from another dimension who wields a nuclear-powered toaster that shoots burnt toast of doom in a Star Wars game. Funny as that may seem, it got old after the game started.

Ah. Enough about banning stuff. Let me now wax lyrical about the joy of banning players.