What do YOU do with a disruptive player ?

[soloprobe]

I've had a rocky game session , with a disruptive, whinny player . oh sure He calmed down and played , but I'm not looking forward to running my game with him again. Since I never refuse to let anyone ,who comes to my gaming table play ,I'm on the horns of a delema. I was thinking of e-mailing him and telling him the next time I run traveller ,stay home . Instead , I'm asking other GMs what they,ve done to deal with disruptive players.

I stated this first session that this would be for Character generation . This guy shows up ,with TWO PREGENERATED Characters and whines : "I don't want to roll up characters I want to play! I want to play right now!" After examining the character sheets He brought I discover His Characters are for MEGATRAVELLER. .....I'm running CLASSIC TRAVELLER, and STILL there's an argument before he rolls up a character. This argument got ALL the other players involved before he rolls up a character, who won't participate. I'm thinking I should tell him to stay home. what would you do?

 

[Rover]

If he was a friend and you thought he could change I would call the guy on the phone, or meet face to face, and have an adult conversation with him. I really don't think email is the means of communication for an issue like this. Don't be accusitory or insulting just inform him that he behavior is disruptive to the group. Maybe he doesn't see it. Tell him you want the game to fun for all and each player will have his chance to shine. Remind him the game is co-operative and not about winning as an individual but overcoming challenges as a team. If he treats your concerns seriously give him one more chance. If he gets all defensive tell him you'd rather not have him back.

If he was just a one time charlie and you don't know him from adam don't invite him back. If contacts you and asks why tell him something like his style of play didn't mesh with the group.

 

[beowulf2044]

You said his character 'didn't participate'. Does that mean he didn't get actively involved in the game after character generation? And if he didn't, then what was the problem? It's the ones who try and hog all the action and attempt to dominate the other players that seem to be the real problems.

 

[Supplement Four]

Definitely tell him that he disrupts the game.

Your call. If you think you can straighten him out, then have a harsh one-on-one talk with him: "If you come to my game again like that, you won't be invited back."

Or, you just cut the cancer out now, before it infects the entire body: "I'm afraid you're not invited back to the game."

I think you do owe him a call. Not an e-mail. Do it face to face if you can--a phone call if you can't. Don't just play and forget to invite him. That's bad form. Be in control of your game. You are the GM. When players agree to you having that role, you have a responsibility to them and yourself to keep the game lively and fun. If it means dropping a player, then it means dropping a player.

 

[aramis]

1) Point out to him that, despite the similarities, and despite the convertibility, you're using CT, and characters need to be CT characters done with the group present for the "egging on" factors that entails and to esure a fair baseline.

2) Point out that his disruptions to the group dynamic need to be resolved. Ask the group about it; put his continuance in the group's hands, rather than solely your own... Is his presence worth it for the majority?

Sometimes, you will be surprised that way. I had one player annoying the hell out of me in a D&D group.... the players, however, were having great fun with his <expletive><anatomical location> of a character...

3) if he's really too over the top... kill his character. Use random targeting, but he gets the leftover slots... all of them. All the time. When he's not disruptive, they are rerolls.

4) Get him to say "Xen Xanfried" or "Scout Xen" and have that character show up...

Xen Xanfried: AACFF7 Commo Scout 5 terms. Pilot 2, Computer 2, Engineer 1, Carousing 3, PSR 7, Telepathy 7, Teleport 7, psi-crystal implant (holds 25 PsiPts)

 

[Blue Ghost]

IIRC the only difference between CT and MT are the combat rules. The characters are interchangeable, are they not?

Otherwise I'd find a new gaming group.

 

[Icosahedron]

I'd agree with most of the above advice, but I'd disagree with Aramis on a couple of points (sorry mate, nothing personal. )

Although a group vote can be a good thing, something like this needs to be unanimous, otherwise it can split the group. Clearly it isn't unanimous, because you don't want him.
If you're unhappy, the game doesn't have much hope. To a large degree, the game is the GM.

I would avoid mounting attacks on his character. You need to separate player issues from character issues, that just leads to resentment.

I'd say that whether you know him or not, he deserves a second chance. You say he calmed down, maybe he'll continue to be calm and next session he will have got over his sulk and may participate.

If he doesn't, then eject him - preferably face to face. EDIT: and not in front of the others.

 

[far-trader]

IIRC the only difference between CT and MT are the combat rules. The characters are interchangeable, are they not?

Pretty significant skill differences, both in levels and usage between CT and MT, less so between CT+ and MT.

CT+ being the various expanded career gens.

I'd probably have looked at the pre-generated characters and converted them on the spot to CT (or CT+ as the case may have been), handed them back to the player and asked if they wanted to play the edited characters or gen new ones.

It's a tough balancing act, player desires for a character concept vs ref desires for a game concept. I've had my own problems with players not following clear rules for acceptable char gen. I'm always torn between wanting to allow them to play what they will have fun with vs the perceived and real disadvantages the players who gen by my rules end up with. Typically the games have failed. I've lost interest due to the agravation of dealing with the inequalities and not wanting to disappoint the players, the creative outside the rules generators and the by the rules generators.

My most memorable and fun games were the "role" played ones vs the "roll" played ones. In my favorite "role" played one most of the gaming didn't even factor "rolled" data. We just "acted" and "played" our parts with the generation being simple guidlines.

Anyway, what I'm thinking in the last para above is, if the player was a good "role" player I'd forgive much "roll" playing, whether pre-game or at the table, but if they were simply a "roll" player, or worse yet if I suspected them of being a fudged "roll" player munchikin I'd be less likely to cut them any slack.

None of which is probably what you're looking for advice wise

 

[aramis]

IIRC the only difference between CT and MT are the combat rules. The characters are interchangeable, are they not?

Otherwise I'd find a new gaming group.

No, there are differences in skill rates (additional 0.7 skills per term in basic), difference in cascades, and many more cascades on the tables.

Additionally, the use of the DGP task system (originally for CT).

Plus the damage taking and weapons stats, and the design system.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Well, we used the task system, but to use the char-gen seemed to be nearly the same. Though truth be told we did use the MT char gen system when we were doing MT adventuring.

On the disruptive player bit; the last gaming group I was with we had a truly idiot-jerk who knew the rules, but liked to be an annoyance just for the sake of it. And, for some reason, wanted to be my friend. I personally couldn't stand the man. I still can't.

The guy was a total nut case.

Example; we played the T20 Babylon-5 game, and he's role-playing a space station manager on a different space station. A "Centauri", and is doing his best Lando imitation. The payoff for the adventure was ... *drum roll* ... ONE BILLION CREDITS, plus AN EXTRA BILLION is we did it right or somesuch.

Wow. Now. Is this disruptive? No, but his sexual jokes (which weren't good in the first place, and more like sexual statement to provoke reaction than actual attempts at humor) were a bother, and his wanton cookyness (I say wanton, because it was deliberate) really gnawed at the group, me included.

The man was scum. Still is. I finally opted out of the group for a variety of reasons, but he was high on the list.

In general, get rid of whoever's being a nuisance. You're there to have fun, not keep player-X entertained at the expense of player-Y.

 

[JustinInOz]

On the assumption that the person is chronologically an adult, they are not going to change their behaviours in a hurry. If they will ever change. Secondly, you don't owe them anything.

In fact they already owe you something that they will never be able to repay, a wasted gaming session and several hours of your life.

If you are feeling charitable, tell they why you are not goint to play with them again. Focus on behaviours rather than attitudes or what you believe they were thinking/feeling. The feedback will be more useful to them that way. The sooner feedback is delivered, the more effective it is. What ever you do, don't beat around the bush. Give them the feedback immediately after saying "hello".

If you are not feeling charitable, simply do not contact them again. Life is too short to spend time in the company of people who are painful. It is the responsibility of their parents to develop social skills and consiousness of the needs of those outside themselves, if they have failed in this mission, you are a fool to take it up.

I play games with people who I truly like. It is a mutually beneficial social exercise. We create a consensual fiction of drama and heroism. It is not a place for people to work out their personal problems.

It seems that your principle of never turning people away from the gaming table should be reviewed in light of this player. I would rather turn one person away than have one person drive away the rest. The world has a habit of challenging axioms with situations that were not thought of when the axioms were formulated.

In the end, it is your call.

 

[Keklas Rekobah]

Tell him to stay home, and threaten to tell his mom if he doesn't like it. Then either change the time or the location of the game, or both.

I've never put up with a whiner in one of my games, unless I was married to her.

 

[sabredog]

Use them to show how the monster works to the players and then don't invite them back.

I don't have this problem but once in a blue moon since I play with friends, but sometimes one of them acts out from some reason or another that usually isn't related to play. In those cases we all just cajole and heckle them back into line. Or they get thrown in the low berth until they calm down.

 

[Peter Schutze]

I stopped the game and closed the door behind me

one of my sons usually came out within 20 minutes a bit bruised and very apologetic

 

[epicenter00]

Since I never refuse to let anyone ,who comes to my gaming table play ,I'm on the horns of a delema.

I'd change this from "never refuse" to "I give everyone a chance to join in the fun. If they're disruptive or don't fit in, they may no longer be welcome though."

I was thinking of e-mailing him and telling him the next time I run traveller ,stay home . Instead , I'm asking other GMs what they,ve done to deal with disruptive players.

You should deal with it face-to-face where they can see your expression and there's sufficient back-and-forth for you to explain and clarify your position without the misunderstandings inherent to email, IM, and telephone. It's difficult to do, I know; we're raised in a culture where it's okay to be direct about a lot of subjects that probably shouldn't be aired honestly while we're supposed to be passive-aggressive about subjects that should be aired directly and honestly. In addition, a lot of players (and people) don't take criticism of their behavior well. However, you're the GM and that gives you a position of some "moral" superiority if they want to play in your game.

Explain to the player what you didn't enjoy about the player's attitude and tell them upfront if they're going to continue being that way, they're not welcome at your game. You prefer to let everyone play, but it wasn't enjoyable for you to run the game with them at the table with that attitude. They might have thought they were being funny, clever, or cute, but it came across to you as simply whiny and passive-aggressive; the hallmarks of someone who doesn't really want to play for whatever reason. Tell them that they made it abundantly clear that they're not happy with some of the things you did in your game. However, you're going to have to declare the "my way or the highway" caveat here - you're the GM, it's your game, and it's not a negotiation. If they want a game that's run differently, they're welcome to run a game the way they want it and that you'll give it a try if they run it after yours and that you might even enjoy their method of running games, but at the moment, you're running the game, not them.

 

[Samules]

I doubt this will help solve your problems since we have a gaming group where everyone in under 15 but it might add a bit of humor to this otherwise non-entertaining thread. One of the players used to start humming, quoting annoying youtube vids (I'ma Firin mah Lazahr, and Fireballs Young said repeatedly were the common ones), or just generally being annoying. One time one of the other players said "I think slugs make your tongue numb." It continued from there "That would probably shut him up","Are there any in your yard", "There's a crushed snail on the front walk, would that work?". Now all we have to do is say "slugs" when we want him to be quiet!
:rofl: