Would you invite this player?

[Bawylie]

I wouldn’t extend an invitation in this case.

Generally, I don’t introduce new players to established groups and campaigns. I find it disruptive, difficult to play catch-up, and there can be some friction if the parties involved don’t know one another so well. They may not fit right.

On the other side of things, if I were starting up a new campaign and had a different mix of people who wanted to play and none of them were too well acquainted, then I would probably invite him.

I come from very long campaigns in person at my home with established groups. And that informs my advice here. Ask someone who games with rotating players online, and none of what concerns me might even apply. What fits varies. But in this case it’d be a no from me.

 

[Imaculata]

So, you have a problematic player AND your group is already pretty big?

Seems like the solution is easy: don't invite him in. My own group is 6-people (DM included), and anything more would be way too much. I wouldn't even consider adding more people, no matter how much fun they are as players... but if they are not fun either, then why do you want to invite them?

However, if you really desperately want to invite him to your group, a solid session 0 will sort it all out. Make sure he understands what sort of playing style is expected of him, and if he still protests, he's not welcome.

 

[Eltab]

Invite him over for a session or two.
He can help you out with DM Chores the first session, listen in, think out a character that will help the group and fit in. The second session he can play his character.
See how it goes. Talk with your core group. If everybody likes him along, invite him back with intent to join. If it goes badly, tell him so privately.

 

[Celebrim]

"That's what my character would do" isn't actually the root of the problem, but a symptom of it. I mean, isn't everyone just doing what their character would do?

The root of the problem is creating a character that doesn't have the personality to be a functional member of a group, which is often a symptom of being the sort of player that doesn't have the personality to be a functional member of a group.

The correct response to, "That is what my character would do?", is "Why did you create a character that was going to not get along well with others, and in particular wasn't going to get along well with this party?"

And stepping back from that further, if it was obvious from the character sheet, character concept, and backstory that this PC wasn't going to play well with others, why did the GM approve the character? This is absolutely especially true when dealing with a player you haven't seen play before.

One GMing mistake that took me nearly two decades to really overcome was the idea that a player could play anything that they wanted, and I as GM didn't have anything to say about that. This mistake was rooted in an idea that I still consider a very good one, which is "Everything in the game universe is the province of the DM, except for the PC's, which are the exclusive domain of the players. GMs should never tell player's how to play their characters." But, the problem with extending that out to the level of character creation, is that it's also the responsibility of the GM to make sure the game is a cooperative, social, enjoyable play experience for everyone, which means that the general idea of the party or group has to be established. Is the party generally heroic? A villainous character might not be the best idea. Is the party generally villainous? Well, an honorable character might not be the best idea. If a player is going to play a character that will prompt them at some time during play to say, "Well, it's just what my character would do!", chances are you should have put your foot down when the character concept was introduced.

And if, "That's just what my character would do." persists even then, then probably the best thing to do is make sure the character bears the full weight of their choices, and tell the play privately that the group is not happy with the player choosing to sabotage the story and they need to find a motivation or character for continuing the story rather than doing stuff that puts a stop to it.

As for this particular situation, more than 6 players can be tough to deal with. Six is I consider the top limit where the actual personalities of the PCs can matter. Above six players RPGs increasingly have to focus entirely on group goals and personifying and exploring character has to recede into the background as no longer a viable aesthetic of play. There just isn't enough time to devote to individual spot light or individual goals. If your dominate aesthetic of play tends to be puzzle solving, tactical combat, and stuff like that, and everyone is generally OK with a story on rails with a single group goal like, "Defeat the BBEG and save the world", then you can generally do 7 or 8 players. But there won't be a lot of deep and meaningful RP, because it's really hard to have 8 or 9 way conversations. In my experience, you are pushing to the point where groups tend to fracture, pushing you toward a situation where you are trying to run two or more simultaneous games.

The other problem you get above 6 players, and really this is already a problem at 6, is that if you are running any kind of story based game, you really can't afford to have players missing from a session. So the more players you have, the harder it is to get everyone together. Once you get up to like 8 or more players, I find that about the only game you can run is a haven/delve type game where at the end of each session everyone is assumed to retire to the haven. That way, anyone that is missing can be assumed to have returned to the haven and had some business to attend to. It's almost impossible to run a game successfully in the long term were the PC is in the session, but the player is not. "Someone run my character for me" does not work 90% of the time.

 

[jgsugden]

I like to give people chances. Talk to the team and have a discussion about t. Give everyone an opportunity to veto the new addition in private.

If they're wlling, invite him for a one shot with preconstructed characters - giving him a generous and trustworthy cleric to play. See how it goes. If it goes well, and if everyone else is on board to try, tell him about the concerns and ask him if he can take them into consideration when paying with the group, and advise him that building a character that would rob other players, etc... is likely not a good idea. There are lots of character types that will not work against their allies... pick one of those.

If it doesn't work out, let him know i wasn't a good fit and invite him to do some other things, like board games, go catch a movie join an orgy, etc....

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[S'mon]

Maybe talk to him and set some table rules/expectations, like no PVP item stealing in this game (personally I'm fine with PVP on the understanding that other PCs are free to punish/expel/kill in retribution too - my biggest issue is with players who resent the PvPer OOC when it's a genre-appropriate behaviour as in most swords & sorcery).

 

[Imaculata]

One GMing mistake that took me nearly two decades to really overcome was the idea that a player could play anything that they wanted, and I as GM didn't have anything to say about that. This mistake was rooted in an idea that I still consider a very good one, which is "Everything in the game universe is the province of the DM, except for the PC's, which are the exclusive domain of the players. GMs should never tell player's how to play their characters." But, the problem with extending that out to the level of character creation, is that it's also the responsibility of the GM to make sure the game is a cooperative, social, enjoyable play experience for everyone, which means that the general idea of the party or group has to be established. Is the party generally heroic? A villainous character might not be the best idea. Is the party generally villainous? Well, an honorable character might not be the best idea. If a player is going to play a character that will prompt them at some time during play to say, "Well, it's just what my character would do!", chances are you should have put your foot down when the character concept was introduced.

One of the most important things I learned, along with the concept of a session 0.

 

[Baron Von Mandrick]

As others have said be clear about the expectations before the game starts. I would do it in private so he doesn't feel ganged up by the rest of the players.

1. Just let him know that the expectations for the game are that the party will not steal for each other. He's welcome to create the kind of character he wishes, but he should be able to come up with a character driven reason to not steal from his team.

2. As far as scene hogging, it might be good to mention that since there are 7 people playing there will be a lot of need to share the game and spotlight with the others. This might be mentioned to all of the players before the session as well.

3. Mention that you are bringing this up to him because of experience and that it is necessary to make the game fun for everyone. Let him know if he can follow these rules for everyone's enjoyment he will be welcome and you will look forward to game with him. But that you will understand if he feels that this would kill the fun of the game for the style he wishes to play, you will understand if he bows out of the game. Also mention that because of the demand of handling all 7 players, breaking these agreements will result in not being invited back for this campaign.

There may be other information that I'm not aware of, but I would start with that.

 

[Riley37]

Even better, have him help DM. For example, he can run some of the NPCs or help run combat. Most people are not going to enjoy just setting and watching other people play.

If his main goal is to learn from you, then he might learn faster on your side of the DM screen.

If you meet with him before the session starts, and go over "here's the foes you will run, here's their motives, here's the stat blocks"... and ALSO go over "here's what I want from the scene, here's my backup plan if the fight is too hard or too easy"... then he will get to see how you make decisions, rather than just seeing what decisions you make.