So I just started a new campaign, and we are about 5 sessions in. There is one player (A low intelligence goliath fighter) who is chaotic good. This player has kinda been a problem from the get-go. Anytime I set up a scenario he a. Wants to kill it, b. Wants to break it, c. Does nothing, or d. Will ask to do something extremely hard for me to come up with. All our sessions so far have been together except for last night. Last night, we played via FaceTime, and this player was blatantly cheating his rolls. He was getting max or close to max damage every roll, and he got at least 10 nat20s. The lowest he rolled was about a 15.
Some of my players I have sensed (and talked with) feel annoyed when this fighter wants to do something crazy before consulting with the rest of the party.
Example:
Me: "Deep inside the cave you see a silhouette of three hunched figures. Do you proceed?"
Players: "We should be careful, they are either hostages, or it could be a--"
Interjecting Fighter: "I would like to pull out my swords and RUN at them." (His intent was to kill)
Party follows in attempt to stop this player from doing anything irrational.
Summary: I've been having major frustration with this player. To shrug him off when he says he wants to do something crazy, I usually just say to discuss with his teammates, and usually he just agrees with the party. He is a "It's what my player would do since his is Chaotic Good!" type of player. How should I deal with 1. Cheating his rolls, and 2. Being annoying to the DM and his party?
1. Ask for him to come up with a better backstory, some traits, etc.
2. Get his character sheet, roll for him/ask him to screen share w/ you
3. Point out that he is CG, ask him why he likes to murder
4. I have had this exact player, without cheating on dice rolls.
5. Try this mechanic that will give a nudge away from combat, but expand on it: Acid damage is hard to heal, since it represents tendons, muscles being burned away (Use the old ability score damage rule), large amounts of slashing can cut off limbs, etc.
He is using what is known as ”the wangrod defense” its in a Matt colville video, I don’t know which one. (Virtually) any time a player says ”But that’s what my character would do” it means they are being a jerk and at least part of them realizes it. This is doubly so if they’ve gone cn for alignment, which most people just think of as a license to be crazy. They are the one who made that character. They are the one choosing to make the character behave in that way. The player is not passively watching their character interact with the world, they can choose to behave differently.
You need to have an out of character discussion with the player and tell them, basically, they need to stop. If they don’t, kick them from the group. (Players are a dime a dozen, you’ll fill the seat easily) It sounds harsh, but it’s the most efficient way. I could also bring up that if a character starts acting like that, the rest of the party, in character, would be very reasonable in telling that character to leave, but that’s not really the issue. In character consequences for the behavior of a player do not solve the problem. It needs to be a frank real person discussion.
As for the cheating, you have well-founded suspicions. It’s possible that the die were with him that day, but not likely. You can require everyone use some kind of online due roller where he won’t be able to cheat, or demand he point his camera at the die while he rolls. But here, again, I’m leaning towards just kicking the person. They are cheating and a jerk. You don’t need the headache.
This is doubly so if they’ve gone cn for alignment, which most people just think of as a license to be crazy.
As long as they can justify being crazy and there's a co-operating party, a campaign where everyone goes crazy can be fun.
If your player is the most aggressive, then monsters will be most aggressive towards him. Therefore when he no longer has enough HP to fight he can die. Or be less aggressive.
I have played with him once as a player myself. His character was an anti social air genasi archer. This character did not like RP nor does his current one.
My current plan:
First is to talk and ask him to chill out, try and learn why he acts the way he does.
If he continues, kill off his character in hopes that he will make a reasonable like the one I played with.
should it continue even then, I will express how we (Me and the players) have asked you to stop, and must now ask you to leave.
As for cheating: This was our very first session online, this week we are going back to in person. Anytime it was in person he would roll legit, and not be a jerk. But when it seems like it since we couldn't see the rolls, he took the chance to make himself win.
Does this seem reasonable? Let me know if I should add or remove something
I have played with him once as a player myself. His character was an anti social air genasi archer. This character did not like RP nor does his current one.
My guess is that the choice to play anti-social characters is because the player doesn't want to RP. I'd suggest talking about how RP is an important part of your game and D&D in general, and then asking straight up if they feel comfortable RPing and what you can do help.
If he continues, kill off his character in hopes that he will make a reasonable like the one I played with.
Don't do it like that.
First of all, a DM should never just kill off a character because he/she wants to. If a player asked for it (wants to replace the character, feels like a sacrifice of life would be RP-appropriate) that is a different story. And if the dice happen to say a character dies, well then the character dies. But going into it with the intent of killing a PC is not something I consider appropriate for GMs to do.
Second of all, it won't work the way you are imagining. You have already described someone who appears to be, as a player, uninterested in the finer RP-aspects of the game. The player makes up anti-social loners so as not to have to RP, or makes up crazy chaotic-neutral-murder-hobos and just tries to force combat. This player is highly unlikely to come up with a more RP-heavy character just because you kill the current one off. They will just make up another character similar to the first 2. And even if you somehow force something like a LG paladin on the player, either it won't be fun for them at all, or else they will just play it like a CN anti-paladin anyway, and not care.
You can't make someone want to play D&D your way. If this player has fun doing crazy stuff and you are not happy with that play style (and by the sound of it neither is the table), you need to have that OOC discussion and maybe come to the unfortunately but necessary conclusion that your play styles are not currently compatible, and the player may need to stop joining you at the table. Remember that in addition to his wangrod video (which is by the way called "The Wangrod Defense") and his video on "Problem Players," Colville has also said famously, and correctly, that "No D&D is better than bad D&D."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
First is to talk and ask him to chill out, try and learn why he acts the way he does.
If he continues, kill off his character in hopes that he will make a reasonable like the one I played with.
Yes, have a talk with him. No GM should go out with the plan being to kill off a PC (there's one but that's not this).
If he has two characters that are similar in personality, it is likely that other characters he creates will be similar. Some folks just don't like to RP and want to do action hero 24/7. If talking to him doesn't work, he can find another table to play at. It is your table. It is ok to get rid of a player that is making the game unfun for you and the other players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
I had a battle idiot in a group not long ago. She would constantly fling doors open and the group, because the encounters were pretty easy, didn't have much trouble handling the fights, so while obviously disgruntled and unhappy with her, would grin and bear it. I decided the next door she flung open (a training room for the Orc Soldiers) was being used for crossbow practice. She took 3 of the 4 bolts and the Barbarian, who rushed into the room as she fell, at 3 himself (before he raged, OW) The fight was a lot more dangerous, and 2 characters were knocked unconscious. Only a quick heal from the Cleric saved the Warlock, who had failed 2 death saves in a row. After the fight, they all chewed her out (in character no less) and OOC told her to stop being such a twit. She continued to do irritating little stuff, but did rein it in enough that her RL boyfriend (the Barbarian) didn't want to swat her on the noggin every session.
Maybe a shock like that, where the entire party seems in danger, might help? You can intervene in any way you want to "save" them, the Cleric's God smashes the foes to save his priest, an unelected ally swoops in to save the day, whatever. But perhaps if the whole party gets kinda on his to tone it back a little at least, he can see he's disrupting everyone and will work a bit to fit in. Maybe still slavering and muttering about killing and smashing, but with another character holding his arm, "Easy big fella, settle down now,"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
He is using what is known as ”the wangrod defense” its in a Matt colville video, I don’t know which one. (Virtually) any time a player says ”But that’s what my character would do” it means they are being a jerk and at least part of them realizes it. This is doubly so if they’ve gone cn for alignment, which most people just think of as a license to be crazy. They are the one who made that character. They are the one choosing to make the character behave in that way. The player is not passively watching their character interact with the world, they can choose to behave differently.
You need to have an out of character discussion with the player and tell them, basically, they need to stop. If they don’t, kick them from the group. (Players are a dime a dozen, you’ll fill the seat easily) It sounds harsh, but it’s the most efficient way. I could also bring up that if a character starts acting like that, the rest of the party, in character, would be very reasonable in telling that character to leave, but that’s not really the issue. In character consequences for the behavior of a player do not solve the problem. It needs to be a frank real person discussion.
As for the cheating, you have well-founded suspicions. It’s possible that the die were with him that day, but not likely. You can require everyone use some kind of online due roller where he won’t be able to cheat, or demand he point his camera at the die while he rolls. But here, again, I’m leaning towards just kicking the person. They are cheating and a jerk. You don’t need the headache.
CN is a wonderful alignment, not a "Licence to be crazy" Your player has harmed the tradition of chaos and his evil must be used against him(Hint: Grazz't is a shapechanger who can disguise himself as a weak human for your player to murder).
I had a battle idiot in a group not long ago. She would constantly fling doors open and the group, because the encounters were pretty easy, didn't have much trouble handling the fights, so while obviously disgruntled and unhappy with her, would grin and bear it. I decided the next door she flung open (a training room for the Orc Soldiers) was being used for crossbow practice. She took 3 of the 4 bolts and the Barbarian, who rushed into the room as she fell, at 3 himself (before he raged, OW) The fight was a lot more dangerous, and 2 characters were knocked unconscious. Only a quick heal from the Cleric saved the Warlock, who had failed 2 death saves in a row. After the fight, they all chewed her out (in character no less) and OOC told her to stop being such a twit. She continued to do irritating little stuff, but did rein it in enough that her RL boyfriend (the Barbarian) didn't want to swat her on the noggin every session.
Maybe a shock like that, where the entire party seems in danger, might help? You can intervene in any way you want to "save" them, the Cleric's God smashes the foes to save his priest, an unelected ally swoops in to save the day, whatever. But perhaps if the whole party gets kinda on his to tone it back a little at least, he can see he's disrupting everyone and will work a bit to fit in. Maybe still slavering and muttering about killing and smashing, but with another character holding his arm, "Easy big fella, settle down now,"
This is fantastic! All help from everyone has been very much appreciated!
He is using what is known as ”the wangrod defense” its in a Matt colville video, I don’t know which one. (Virtually) any time a player says ”But that’s what my character would do” it means they are being a jerk and at least part of them realizes it. This is doubly so if they’ve gone cn for alignment, which most people just think of as a license to be crazy. They are the one who made that character. They are the one choosing to make the character behave in that way. The player is not passively watching their character interact with the world, they can choose to behave differently.
You need to have an out of character discussion with the player and tell them, basically, they need to stop. If they don’t, kick them from the group. (Players are a dime a dozen, you’ll fill the seat easily) It sounds harsh, but it’s the most efficient way. I could also bring up that if a character starts acting like that, the rest of the party, in character, would be very reasonable in telling that character to leave, but that’s not really the issue. In character consequences for the behavior of a player do not solve the problem. It needs to be a frank real person discussion.
As for the cheating, you have well-founded suspicions. It’s possible that the die were with him that day, but not likely. You can require everyone use some kind of online due roller where he won’t be able to cheat, or demand he point his camera at the die while he rolls. But here, again, I’m leaning towards just kicking the person. They are cheating and a jerk. You don’t need the headache.
CN is a wonderful alignment, not a "Licence to be crazy" Your player has harmed the tradition of chaos and his evil must be used against him(Hint: Grazz't is a shapechanger who can disguise himself as a weak human for your player to murder).
Would it be wise to point that out? The way how the player is acting is more CE than CN? Then encourage him to act more CN?
It sounds like you're tempted to try and handle this in-game, but all that will do is create an adversarial player/DM dynamic that'll make him actively resist coming around to your suggestions rather than want to be a better player. You'll entrench him in his viewpoints by targeting his character and trying to get him to change narratively.
Plan A should be to talk with the player outside of game. Tell him you put a lot of work into this game and it feels like he's being disrespectful when he tries to ruin it. Tell him the other players are taking time out of their schedules to play just like him and deserve a game they want to play in. Tell him he can still play a funny character, but ask him to maybe dial it back a little so everyone can have fun.
If he doesn't respond to an honest and frank discussion, then killing his character won't be the end of your problem.
I have played with him once as a player myself. His character was an anti social air genasi archer. This character did not like RP nor does his current one.
My guess is that the choice to play anti-social characters is because the player doesn't want to RP. I'd suggest talking about how RP is an important part of your game and D&D in general, and then asking straight up if they feel comfortable RPing and what you can do help.
It is fine for a player not to RP and talks to an NPC.
Not every player enjoys talking to NPC and not every character is good at talking to NPC. Do people really want to send in the Char 8 Wizard to persuade the guard?
OP's issue is that he/she has a wangrod in the team.
I have played with him once as a player myself. His character was an anti social air genasi archer. This character did not like RP nor does his current one.
My guess is that the choice to play anti-social characters is because the player doesn't want to RP. I'd suggest talking about how RP is an important part of your game and D&D in general, and then asking straight up if they feel comfortable RPing and what you can do help.
It is fine for a player not to RP and talks to an NPC.
Not every player enjoys talking to NPC and not every character is good at talking to NPC. Do people really want to send in the Char 8 Wizard to persuade the guard?
OP's issue is that he/she has a wangrod in the team.
I enjoy Matt's videos as much as the next person, but this type of player has been around long before the term wangrod. Incidentally, I don't see this problem player as a wangrod. The very words Matt uses for it are "mean" and "cruel". Basically, the toe of player that justifies their character torturing an NPC because it's what their character would do. Sure, the OP's problem player attacks first, but we've had no indication it's because they're being sadistic. And yes, Matt also notes that the mean/cruel aspects of a wangrod include those done to the DM and players at the table, but with the information given it's a leap to say that the player is doing the listed actions out of cruelty or mean-spiritedness to the group.
My point was that, as a DM, I always try to look at what a problem player is doing and figure out why in order to course-correct.
For example: we don't have any info on the table. If the other players take a long time to strategize and plan before entering combat or on their turns in combat, this player could be "pushing" the game pace by taking an action that instantly "starts" a game resolution.
Or, The other players might enjoy RP to the point that game sessions are mostly RP with minimal combat, and this player wants to be in a combat-heavy campaign.
To the OP: there are some good suggestions above by all the commenters. But at the end of the day, we'll never have the insight you have to your players and table. It could be that the problem player is bored with the pace of the sessions, or doing everything possible to avoid RP encounters, or he could actually just be a giant jerk that takes pleasure in watching those around him suffer and gains immense pleasure whenever he sees a look of frustration in your eyes because he feels that when he hi-jacks a session he is in control. But with that said, the only way you'll find out is by having a direct and honest conversation one-on-one with him. If he's truly a jerk/wangrod, boot him from your game. If there's a little bit of compromise to be had, go for it, but make sure to warn him he'll be booted if it starts again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I just started a new campaign, and we are about 5 sessions in. There is one player (A low intelligence goliath fighter) who is chaotic good. This player has kinda been a problem from the get-go. Anytime I set up a scenario he a. Wants to kill it, b. Wants to break it, c. Does nothing, or d. Will ask to do something extremely hard for me to come up with. All our sessions so far have been together except for last night. Last night, we played via FaceTime, and this player was blatantly cheating his rolls. He was getting max or close to max damage every roll, and he got at least 10 nat20s. The lowest he rolled was about a 15.
Some of my players I have sensed (and talked with) feel annoyed when this fighter wants to do something crazy before consulting with the rest of the party.
Example:
Me: "Deep inside the cave you see a silhouette of three hunched figures. Do you proceed?"
Players: "We should be careful, they are either hostages, or it could be a--"
Interjecting Fighter: "I would like to pull out my swords and RUN at them." (His intent was to kill)
Party follows in attempt to stop this player from doing anything irrational.
Summary: I've been having major frustration with this player. To shrug him off when he says he wants to do something crazy, I usually just say to discuss with his teammates, and usually he just agrees with the party. He is a "It's what my player would do since his is Chaotic Good!" type of player. How should I deal with 1. Cheating his rolls, and 2. Being annoying to the DM and his party?
A New DM up against the World
1. Ask for him to come up with a better backstory, some traits, etc.
2. Get his character sheet, roll for him/ask him to screen share w/ you
3. Point out that he is CG, ask him why he likes to murder
4. I have had this exact player, without cheating on dice rolls.
5. Try this mechanic that will give a nudge away from combat, but expand on it: Acid damage is hard to heal, since it represents tendons, muscles being burned away (Use the old ability score damage rule), large amounts of slashing can cut off limbs, etc.
Enjoy my magic items, spells, monsters, my race, and a few feats. And GIVE ME FEEDBACK... or else.
Like what I say?
⬐ Just press this little guy right here.
SO sorry, I just double checked, he is a CN
A New DM up against the World
Ah, well ignore that bit. Is the rest helpful?
Enjoy my magic items, spells, monsters, my race, and a few feats. And GIVE ME FEEDBACK... or else.
Like what I say?
⬐ Just press this little guy right here.
Very!
A New DM up against the World
He is using what is known as ”the wangrod defense” its in a Matt colville video, I don’t know which one. (Virtually) any time a player says ”But that’s what my character would do” it means they are being a jerk and at least part of them realizes it. This is doubly so if they’ve gone cn for alignment, which most people just think of as a license to be crazy. They are the one who made that character. They are the one choosing to make the character behave in that way. The player is not passively watching their character interact with the world, they can choose to behave differently.
You need to have an out of character discussion with the player and tell them, basically, they need to stop. If they don’t, kick them from the group. (Players are a dime a dozen, you’ll fill the seat easily) It sounds harsh, but it’s the most efficient way. I could also bring up that if a character starts acting like that, the rest of the party, in character, would be very reasonable in telling that character to leave, but that’s not really the issue. In character consequences for the behavior of a player do not solve the problem. It needs to be a frank real person discussion.
As for the cheating, you have well-founded suspicions. It’s possible that the die were with him that day, but not likely. You can require everyone use some kind of online due roller where he won’t be able to cheat, or demand he point his camera at the die while he rolls. But here, again, I’m leaning towards just kicking the person. They are cheating and a jerk. You don’t need the headache.
As long as they can justify being crazy and there's a co-operating party, a campaign where everyone goes crazy can be fun.
If your player is the most aggressive, then monsters will be most aggressive towards him. Therefore when he no longer has enough HP to fight he can die. Or be less aggressive.
Chilling kinda vibe.
I have played with him once as a player myself. His character was an anti social air genasi archer. This character did not like RP nor does his current one.
My current plan:
First is to talk and ask him to chill out, try and learn why he acts the way he does.
If he continues, kill off his character in hopes that he will make a reasonable like the one I played with.
should it continue even then, I will express how we (Me and the players) have asked you to stop, and must now ask you to leave.
As for cheating: This was our very first session online, this week we are going back to in person. Anytime it was in person he would roll legit, and not be a jerk. But when it seems like it since we couldn't see the rolls, he took the chance to make himself win.
Does this seem reasonable? Let me know if I should add or remove something
A New DM up against the World
My guess is that the choice to play anti-social characters is because the player doesn't want to RP. I'd suggest talking about how RP is an important part of your game and D&D in general, and then asking straight up if they feel comfortable RPing and what you can do help.
Don't do it like that.
First of all, a DM should never just kill off a character because he/she wants to. If a player asked for it (wants to replace the character, feels like a sacrifice of life would be RP-appropriate) that is a different story. And if the dice happen to say a character dies, well then the character dies. But going into it with the intent of killing a PC is not something I consider appropriate for GMs to do.
Second of all, it won't work the way you are imagining. You have already described someone who appears to be, as a player, uninterested in the finer RP-aspects of the game. The player makes up anti-social loners so as not to have to RP, or makes up crazy chaotic-neutral-murder-hobos and just tries to force combat. This player is highly unlikely to come up with a more RP-heavy character just because you kill the current one off. They will just make up another character similar to the first 2. And even if you somehow force something like a LG paladin on the player, either it won't be fun for them at all, or else they will just play it like a CN anti-paladin anyway, and not care.
You can't make someone want to play D&D your way. If this player has fun doing crazy stuff and you are not happy with that play style (and by the sound of it neither is the table), you need to have that OOC discussion and maybe come to the unfortunately but necessary conclusion that your play styles are not currently compatible, and the player may need to stop joining you at the table. Remember that in addition to his wangrod video (which is by the way called "The Wangrod Defense") and his video on "Problem Players," Colville has also said famously, and correctly, that "No D&D is better than bad D&D."
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Yes, have a talk with him. No GM should go out with the plan being to kill off a PC (there's one but that's not this).
If he has two characters that are similar in personality, it is likely that other characters he creates will be similar. Some folks just don't like to RP and want to do action hero 24/7. If talking to him doesn't work, he can find another table to play at. It is your table. It is ok to get rid of a player that is making the game unfun for you and the other players.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I had a battle idiot in a group not long ago. She would constantly fling doors open and the group, because the encounters were pretty easy, didn't have much trouble handling the fights, so while obviously disgruntled and unhappy with her, would grin and bear it. I decided the next door she flung open (a training room for the Orc Soldiers) was being used for crossbow practice. She took 3 of the 4 bolts and the Barbarian, who rushed into the room as she fell, at 3 himself (before he raged, OW) The fight was a lot more dangerous, and 2 characters were knocked unconscious. Only a quick heal from the Cleric saved the Warlock, who had failed 2 death saves in a row. After the fight, they all chewed her out (in character no less) and OOC told her to stop being such a twit. She continued to do irritating little stuff, but did rein it in enough that her RL boyfriend (the Barbarian) didn't want to swat her on the noggin every session.
Maybe a shock like that, where the entire party seems in danger, might help? You can intervene in any way you want to "save" them, the Cleric's God smashes the foes to save his priest, an unelected ally swoops in to save the day, whatever. But perhaps if the whole party gets kinda on his to tone it back a little at least, he can see he's disrupting everyone and will work a bit to fit in. Maybe still slavering and muttering about killing and smashing, but with another character holding his arm, "Easy big fella, settle down now,"
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Yeah, I would agree with that. If yer players are too combat-ready, keep them on their toes. and that will fix them
Enjoy my magic items, spells, monsters, my race, and a few feats. And GIVE ME FEEDBACK... or else.
Like what I say?
⬐ Just press this little guy right here.
As an alignment, wanting to kill everything is CE not CN.
CN is a wonderful alignment, not a "Licence to be crazy" Your player has harmed the tradition of chaos and his evil must be used against him(Hint: Grazz't is a shapechanger who can disguise himself as a weak human for your player to murder).
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
This is fantastic! All help from everyone has been very much appreciated!
A New DM up against the World
Would it be wise to point that out? The way how the player is acting is more CE than CN? Then encourage him to act more CN?
A New DM up against the World
It sounds like you're tempted to try and handle this in-game, but all that will do is create an adversarial player/DM dynamic that'll make him actively resist coming around to your suggestions rather than want to be a better player. You'll entrench him in his viewpoints by targeting his character and trying to get him to change narratively.
Plan A should be to talk with the player outside of game. Tell him you put a lot of work into this game and it feels like he's being disrespectful when he tries to ruin it. Tell him the other players are taking time out of their schedules to play just like him and deserve a game they want to play in. Tell him he can still play a funny character, but ask him to maybe dial it back a little so everyone can have fun.
If he doesn't respond to an honest and frank discussion, then killing his character won't be the end of your problem.
It is fine for a player not to RP and talks to an NPC.
Not every player enjoys talking to NPC and not every character is good at talking to NPC. Do people really want to send in the Char 8 Wizard to persuade the guard?
OP's issue is that he/she has a wangrod in the team.
I enjoy Matt's videos as much as the next person, but this type of player has been around long before the term wangrod. Incidentally, I don't see this problem player as a wangrod. The very words Matt uses for it are "mean" and "cruel". Basically, the toe of player that justifies their character torturing an NPC because it's what their character would do. Sure, the OP's problem player attacks first, but we've had no indication it's because they're being sadistic. And yes, Matt also notes that the mean/cruel aspects of a wangrod include those done to the DM and players at the table, but with the information given it's a leap to say that the player is doing the listed actions out of cruelty or mean-spiritedness to the group.
My point was that, as a DM, I always try to look at what a problem player is doing and figure out why in order to course-correct.
For example: we don't have any info on the table. If the other players take a long time to strategize and plan before entering combat or on their turns in combat, this player could be "pushing" the game pace by taking an action that instantly "starts" a game resolution.
Or, The other players might enjoy RP to the point that game sessions are mostly RP with minimal combat, and this player wants to be in a combat-heavy campaign.
To the OP: there are some good suggestions above by all the commenters. But at the end of the day, we'll never have the insight you have to your players and table. It could be that the problem player is bored with the pace of the sessions, or doing everything possible to avoid RP encounters, or he could actually just be a giant jerk that takes pleasure in watching those around him suffer and gains immense pleasure whenever he sees a look of frustration in your eyes because he feels that when he hi-jacks a session he is in control. But with that said, the only way you'll find out is by having a direct and honest conversation one-on-one with him. If he's truly a jerk/wangrod, boot him from your game. If there's a little bit of compromise to be had, go for it, but make sure to warn him he'll be booted if it starts again.