So one of my players in my Waterdeep: Dragon Heist campaign likes to read about all the NPCs outside of the game which I never had a real problem with at first but he's been increasingly frustrating because he thinks that the characters should act in a different way than they do in the campaign. I disagree and he gets very upset. Along with this one of the other players wants to be an Eldritch Knight then multiclass into wizard later. The first player has been talking to the Eldritch Knight about all of this and decided that he could copy spells into a spell book so he could use them later as a wizard. I said no he cannot, he doesn't get access to being able to copy spells like that until he IS a wizard. That player then got very angry again and argued back and forth with me about it. What do I do? This is becoming increasingly difficult and I just want to ease the tension somehow. These are all my friends so I don't want to tell any of them that they can't play. But when I try to finalize something and say I'm the DM the player gets mad and says "fine do whatever you want." Does anyone have any advice?

On the NPC front, you can simply say that the NPC descriptions in the published material isn't necessarily how YOU are going to play those NPCs.

The player needs to realise that they shouldn't be a rules lawyer, and they should wait until it is THEIR turn to DM before trying to control all aspects of the game.

Maybe you could simply state that you are in control of this campaign NOT them.

The first one is easy. Tell him that you’re changing the adventure from the way it’s published. That’s how I run published adventures anyway, I modify them so that I can run them more than once and they’ll be fun for me to run them each time. 

Rules as written the second one can’t copy spells into a spell book as an Eldritch Knight, but he can create spell scrolls as an Eldritch Knight. Let him do that.

Oof that is a rough arrangement to be in. I think that Tim has a good compromise in terms of letting the Eldritch Knight at least create some spell scrolls

Still, this is a tricky situation to be in. This sounds like a situation where the player should be kicked from the game if they can't stop Backseat DM'ing, which is a real problem when you're talking about a close friend who might take it personally. I'm definitely on your side against this player... reading ahead on a module is generally poor form... obviously, some people just happen to have either played a module before or happen to own the book themselves. It's good to remind him that this isn't a videogame... what's written in the book isn't "programmed" into the game, and you're free to change it as you see fit. Maybe it would do well to make a few drastic changes to the source material just to help reinforce that idea. It's also strange that they're so insistent on you following the adventure exactly as written, while at the same time flagrantly ignoring rules about wizards copying spells. I wish you luck with this... I hope your friend is open to talking about this. The best I can say is that it would be best to speak to them alone, in private without any other players around. People can get more defensive and embarrassed when others are around. Normally I encourage compromise between players and DM's, but I feel like your friend is being very unreasonable and just needs to learn to respect your position as DM.

It is always hard with a backseat DM. My stock response has become, "Well you can rule that way when you're DM." This almost always works, because nobody else really wants to be DM. Fortunately I don't have it come up very often.

I agree with those who have said, explain that you are just using the name/description of the NPC but you are making up your own way of playing them.

Also, I might suggest to the player if they rather read the adventure than play it, they can do that. I don't really like it when people spoilerize the game for themselves but, you can't exactly stop them.

As others have stated:

1. Politely remind your player(s) that as the DM, you are under absolutely no obligation to use those standardized statblocks, they are merely a convenience.
2. Politely remind your players to worry about what they can control, their own characters. Leave working about the other 7,000,000,000 people, and all the monsters, and the gods, and the denizens of the infinite plains, and the laws of physics, and basically everything else that isn’t their own characters to you. After all, you have enough to do dealing with all of that, you don’t need to (for lack of a better term) “babysit” the Players or their PCs too.
3. Politely suggest to them that if they don’t like it then they can DM and you’ll be a player. (Very few players in the world will actually call your bluff on that, and the ones that might will likely regret it within a few months.)*

*

I hope that helps.

I can't really add to that. Agree that you can explain to the person that this is your campaign and when they GM, they can do it different. 

Asking them if they want to read or write an adventure instead of play in it is fantastic!

If they don't agree or keep causing trouble you can just pack it up. I've done so before. Explain that you don't want to fight. D&D is supposed to be fun, and they are making it unfun for you. Pack up your stuff and walk out. That doesn't mean quit forever, just for that session because the drama isn't worth it.

If they are your friends, I dont think the passive-aggressive methods above would be cool neither nice or healthy.

For the NPC, I would just start changing names and descriptions - some actions here and there, but this would guarantee your DM role fun, and the player spoiling himself fun as well.

For the player wishing the multiclass, I dont see any reason to not look for a middle ground - nothing needs to be ground ruled, but dont take away the fun from the others if it get too overpowered - negotiate a limit for the first levels of the wizard class (i'll let you transcribe 1 or 2 spells, etc). Raising the difficulty might be nice as well, but let him have fun.

I only play with my friends, and well, at this point they are really my brothers (we're 2 separated tables of 4 each, but everyone knows each other for more than 20 years, with daily Discord server calls and Seinfeld-like talks about nothing). Healthy relationships comes with a lot of discussion and conversations, and you should approach this thinking like that.

Not saying to let them roll over you, but if they are, they aren't really your friends.

first maybe explain the campaign  to the player that disagrees and then talk to the other players about whats happening   if the players dont like the story/campaign the DM came up with  they should discus with the DM about that  rather then argure because its hard to be an DM 

(i dont' have much else to say because this didn't happen to me)

hope this maybe helps

I am surprised someone hasn't stated this, which is at the core of my reaction to the whole thing ...

If the player wants to read the whole campaign before playing it, then the game stops.  That is how I feel.  That player is taking away the DMs agency by contending with the DM to tell him how he has to play his characters.  I can't believe this wasn't hammered by others.

The only problem I have with this from the OP perspective is that these are his friends.  How do you end the campaign and still keep your friends?  I'd find a way to back out of the game and leave it alone.  Someone has a sig line that says "No D&D is better than bad D&D."  This is totally applicable here.

The second tier problem about telling you how to rule as DM on the multi-class question is just icing on the cake.

Save your friendships and end the game before it shoves a wedge between you.

Then, if you like, look for a game with folks that are not yet your friends.  Good luck.

My group consists of family and a friend of my daughter's and we have had a couple issues pop up where questions were asked about rules, mechanics and more.  I have not yet faced a direct challenge to rulings (although there have been a couple odd looks) 

I this situation, I believe a full stop and thorough discussion of HOW this is going to run needs to be had.  Your friend needs to learn that
A: YOU are DM and while you are using a published module as a framework for the campaign, you WILL be adjusting parts to suit YOUR desires.  Ensure the player that when it is THEIR turn to DM, they can and should take similar steps.
B: Mechanically, an Eldtrich Knight can NOT copy spells into a book.  Period.  No further discussion needs to take place, that is a hard fact that the player will need to live with.  Remind them again that when THEY DM, they are most welcome to table rule to allow this, but here, in YOUR campaign, it ain't gonna happen.

Few folks are suggesting handling it with "kid gloves" and making sure to bot hurt feelings.  I disagree, I believe it should be presented as a series of facts (which they are) and NO twiggling back and forth.  If this person is a friend (one worth having) they will be able to accept that YOUR campaign will run by YOUR rules.  If they simply can't see or accept that, you are down to 2 options, drop the player or drop the entire campaign, ensuring the rest of the players understand why.

This whole attitude of trying to be understanding and give everyone what they want is what promotes this type of self-entitled crap to come up so often.  Everyone wants to think their opinion is SO important (because we now teach everyone that it is so, even the moronic and inane opinions) instead of telling people that at times, YOUR opinion will mean nothing to a situation.  I laugh how people face so many issues with entitled folks, yet insist they can['t simply say "no" to something.  Maybe if kids were told NO once in a while growing up, they would feel less entitled as they grow older?

When a player suggests that you are running NPCs wrong, or that you need to let them do something that is contrary to your interpretation of the rules, then:

1. The way you run NPCs is entirely down to you. They are your NPCs. The players have no control of them, their interpretation is irrelevant, and your campaign can follow source material as closely, or as far away as you wish to.

2. If a player wants to do something that you don't think works in-game, then ask them for their interpretation. Then explain yours. Maybe you can come to a solution together. Honestly, if an Eldritch Knight can make scrolls, they should be able to write spells they know into a spell book. However, since they are not currently a wizard, I'd question why they are doing it from an in-game perspective. (Also, EK multiclass into Wizard is a HORRIBLE multiclass, making the character weak as both an EK and a Wizard, so I wouldn't worry much either way).

3. Remind the players that regardless of how they see the rules, if you want to drop a Meteor Swarm on them from a mile away every turn due to a coven of ten level 20 wizards who just showed up, then you can do so.

4. Remind the players that regardless of what they think of your decisions, you can drop an unavoidable, 1 billion damage lightning bolt on them without warning, whenever you want, and there is literally nothing that they can do about it. It's your world. You are more than all the gods combined, you are the universe. If the players think that they are combatting you in some way, they don't understand the game.

Quote from MusicScout >>

I am surprised someone hasn't stated this, which is at the core of my reaction to the whole thing ...

If the player wants to read the whole campaign before playing it, then the game stops.  That is how I feel.  That player is taking away the DMs agency by contending with the DM to tell him how he has to play his characters.  I can't believe this wasn't hammered by others.

The only problem I have with this from the OP perspective is that these are his friends.  How do you end the campaign and still keep your friends?  I'd find a way to back out of the game and leave it alone.  Someone has a sig line that says "No D&D is better than bad D&D."  This is totally applicable here.

The second tier problem about telling you how to rule as DM on the multi-class question is just icing on the cake.

Save your friendships and end the game before it shoves a wedge between you.

Then, if you like, look for a game with folks that are not yet your friends.  Good luck.

 I think that I desperately want the game to be salvageable, but deep down I have to agree that an ultimatum of some kind has to be set. I will say, though, we haven't heard anything negative about the other players, save for the Eldritch Knight, who is only becoming a nuisance thanks to cajoling from the problem player. If this can't be resolved, I feel like it would be better to just kick the one player rather than stop the entire game outright.

Sometimes friend groups have that one friend who they just don't invite to specific activities. Maybe it's the over-competitive friend who starts shoving people and talking way too personal smack during a pickup game. Maybe it's the overcritical  friend who rants about how terrible every movie the group sees together and ruins the experience for everyone else. Maybe it's even the friend who drinks to much any time they join the group at a bar but otherwise is fine. Either way, the campaign itself doesn't need to end just because one player is being disruptive.

In the vein of the above post -- someone, might have been Coleville , might have been someone else, can't remember -- once pointed out that just because you are otherwise friends, doesn't mean that you and someone else will necessarily like playing D&D together. You may be compatible in other ways but not in the style of play you like for D&D.

I have no problem with players calling me out when I get a Rule As Written wrong.  No problem at all.  Although in this case it seems the player is mistaken- only wizards can copy spells... When we are talking subjective stuff like how an npc was role played, I don't allow players to argue with me about that, however.

One effective method is to get the rest of the players to back you up.  Say to them out of game "Hey, have you noticed so-and-so argues with me about pointless stuff like my npcs, slowing the game for all of us and ruining it a bit?" There is a good chance if you feel that way, so do the other players.  Now when so-and-so acts up again, you can finally confront them about it, with the entire table backing you up, with every other player saying they agree with you the DM this is a problem.  It's highly effective trust me.  

 I get that this person is your friend and all, but as long as you do this tactfully your friend should respect that and not get overly upset.