I've been playing 5e for 2 years now and love it. As a DM, I have ran 2 shorter campaigns (to level 5) with no major problems. I just started DMing a larger campaign for my group- the goal is to arrive at level 17 by the end.
One of my players (my brother) recently invited a friend of his and this guy is struggling to "mesh" well with the group. In hindsight, maybe I should've gotten to know the guy a little more before inviting him, but it is what it is. Neither my brother or I could forsee these problems. His (my brother's friend) actions (both as a player and in-game character) are really starting to frustrate the others and myself. It's come to the point where 2 players are talking about quitting. I'm really struggling to know what to do as DM to fix it. As I see it, there are two main issues. For context, he's playing an Arcane Tricker Rogue. Here are the problems as I see them:
1. This player is often arguing the rules even after we explain the rule and the "why". Some examples:
He found a weapon he likes (a scimitar) and wants to become proficient in it automatically (without taking a feat).
He makes a sneak attack while hiding, wants to hide again in the same spot, and then wants another sneak attack.
As a level 2 rogue, he argued that he should be able to escape strong cuffs by "dislocating his wrists and slipping them out" even after he failed the ability check roll to attempt an escape.
There are numerous other examples. These would not be as big a deal if it only happened once or twice and he accepted the rulings. However, it really disrupts the flow of the game when he does it two or three times each session. I've taken a hard stand by not making exceptions to "draw a line in the sand". There's been some improvement.
2. (This issue is the bigger one) In game, this player's character is taking actions that are consistently frustrating the group. Here are some examples:
In the first session, the characters had to save some townspeople and getting there fast was important. The rogue stayed at the back of the group and then snuck off to get to the destination by a different route (supposedly to ambush). I told him it would take him 10 minutes longer by that route, but he insisted. As a result, 2 of the 3 characters that arrived earlier fought in combat were rolling death saves by the time he got there. They narrowly escaped a TPK. He saw himself as the "Savior" because he arrived just in time.
In that same first session, the rogue snuck off and disguised himself as the enemy without talking to the group. Then, in a crowd of 30-50 enemy troops ("I'm in the back of all the troops though" he said), he shot the main villain in the back (I believe I hinted to him it wasn't a good idea and wouldn't work). He tried to use sleight of hand to plant the bow on a nearby soldier and then grapple the same soldier to blame him for doing it. It didn't work and he was taken prisoner. Keep in mind he was level 1. The other players, staying in character, knew he was missing but had no idea where he went. They ended up rescuing him, but it took the whole next session.
When in a cave, he stayed near the back and went to search a room (without the others knowing, of course). I told him it would take 30 minutes to search, but he insisted. It took one of the other characters (when they discovered he was missing) coming back to convince him to come along. Had they not, he would've missed an important encounter (would've been deadly had he not been there).
In every session (we've played 5 or 6 so far), this character has tried to use sleight of hand to plant flowers on the other characters. Once he hit level 3, he started using mage hand legerdemain to plant flowers on them. When he fails, he tries right away again. (This seems silly, but combined with all the other things, the others are just annoyed)
During a session we played online, he left his computer without telling anyone. The party was traveling between cities and was stopping for the night. While he was gone, unknown to us, the group set up a watch schedule. When he came back and found out was happening, he insisted he get first watch. The group informed him they had set a schedule, he said, "Had I been here, I would've wanted first watch." They told him he had third, but he said, "No, I'm challenging you for first watch. Roll." He demanded again and again a dice roll and wouldn't give in. It took another player yelling (I should've stepped in before but didn't realize it would escalate that fast) to get him to give in. But the following nights of the journey he insisted on first watch every time and they gave in just to avoid a problem.
This player often insists things are his way without giving reasons or backing down. The wizard wanted to be in the back of the marching order and had a good reason (he explained to the group he wanted to recall his familiar without others seeing) but the rogue would not let him.
When he's asked why he's doing these things, he says it's, "Part of his character." (For the record, his alignment is Chaotic Neutral which he said he took because it allows him to basically do whatever he wants.
As I mentioned, by themselves any one of these actions wouldn't be a problem at all. It's the combination of all these small things that have annoyed the other players and gotten to the point where any little thing he does (to be silly or contrary to the group) frustrates them. We've tried talking to him to explain the rules and ask him to work with the group. There's been little improvement. As I mentioned, two of the others are thinking about dropping out.
I feel like I need to have a conversation and be blunt with him. Say something like, "Think about this from a story standpoint. Why would the other characters want to have your character around when he's doing these things? This needs to stop now." I don't want to be too heavy handed, though. I want him to be able to have fun with his character, but not at the expense of others.
Being a DM is tough sometimes :(. What should I do? I would appreciate any ideas. Thanks everyone!
As you said, it's fine to play a chaotic neutral character, but that doesn't mean they get to do what they want without consequences. Currently, his character is making enemies and this could have consequences. Also, while he's playing the character, HE doesn't get to be a jerk.
You could ask him to leave the game.
You could have him make a new character (the rest of the party ditches his character after he turns in from first watch or his character may die in combat and the party refuses to revive him or don't have the resources to save him).
There are multiple ways to approach this; what type of solution are you looking for?
Honesty will set you free :) You said just what to do... "I feel like I need to have a conversation and be blunt with him."
Being a DM can be hard that way but here's the thing to remember. As the DM you are orchestrating a group experience. If gameplay was fine before this new player came into the group then you need to wrangle him in or cut him loose. Sounds like you and the other players are gaming on a different level than he is. So if you want him to continue playing you have to bring him up to your level of play. Sounds like he thought "Oh, yeah, sure I can play D&D. I just get to do whatever I want, It's a fantasy game right?" But just like any other game it has rules.
Yeah, have an open talk with him. Explain to him that not only are you the DM and your word is final, but he is disrupting the game for the other players. Tell him he is on his last strike and one more disruption will have him ejected from the game. If he has an issue with that, eject him immediately.
D&D is a social game and isn't about one person.
And you could always do what I did. We had a rogue who liked to split the group and run off on her own, to the point where the party was discovering an important plot point, and she was over 1500 feet away and walked face first into a Chimera. 5th level rogue vs Chimera. Guess how that fight went? The player learned her lesson.
Honesty will set you free :) You said just what to do... "I feel like I need to have a conversation and be blunt with him."
Yes to this! Sounds like what you probably should do.
There is however a few things in what you write I have a litte difficulty to understand what you as a DM did to "avoid" this:
He disguised in a crowd of 30-50 enemy troops and tried to shoot the big bad guy. OK, you said to him that it was a bad plan (although to me it sounds quite good), but if it was such a bad plan, why don't have him attacked by 50 enemies? Why capture him instead?
If he is insisting on searching a cave for 30 minutes (it sounds like your decision it took that long), just throw the encounter on the other players. Have him sit out and watch. When the encounter is finished, have him make his perception roll. And, no encounter is deadly if a player is missing. That is your choice as a DM, simply make it slightly easier.
But, it sounds like he could need a little pep talk, but also consider why you are telling him it takes that long to search a room, or why his ideas are so bad. (They might have been, but some of your examples actually doesn't sound that "bad" when you read them.)
Thanks for the responses everyone. I figured talking to him directly is the right thing to do. Avoiding it is not going to fix it though, and the other players will just harbor bad feelings.
Wow this is close to home. In the game that I play in, I'm playing a Chaotic Neutral AT with similar predilections for mischief, risky behavior, and selfish instincts. He's definitely put the party at risk multiple times, snuck off to do his own thing to the detriment of the group, and just engaged in general ****ery. I think the the biggest difference between me and your player is that I'm a DM as well and try to be very conscious about how I show up to the table, and I've had multiple out-of-game conversations with the other players to make sure they talk to me if my characters actions ever bother them as players and not simply bother their characters. That said, let me see if I can give you some strategies that my group has used that have yielded positive results:
1: My DM told me right off the bat that my character would need to convince the party to keep him around in the first place.
If this character does reckless and annoying things because "it's what his character would do" then I see no reason why the rest of the party wouldn't abandon him because "it's what their characters would do". This might be harsh, but it could lead to the character rethinking some actions and changing his ways, or possibly it means that your player has to create a new character because his old one was left behind by his party. Worst case scenario, he quits your game, but it honestly sounds like that might be good for your table morale if he's the kind of player you're making him out to be.
2. Encourage your players to talk to him in-game
After several questionable decisions, my party members had (several) in-character conversations about "how we do things as a part of this team". General themes revolved around things like "we share treasure", "we tell each other our plans and strategize as a unit", "we don't do things that would endanger other members of the party", etc... It even went so far that while we were in a library researching how to defeat a monster that we were about to fight, the monk snuck off to see if he could find a book on conflict mediation and has been using strategies from that book to try to approach my character and have these conversations. Taking it as a moment for good roleplay can be effective if that's the kind of group you have.
3. Have an out-of-game conversation to encourage the player to find in-game ways to change
My DM and I are constantly checking with each other to make sure that my character doesn't go too far. As for my part in all of this, I've been really appreciative of the lengths the other characters (and by extension the players) have gone to try to bring my character into the fold. I'm using it as an opportunity for my character to (slowly) become more collaborative in a way that doesn't feel like I'm betraying his chaotic trickster nature but also respects the environment at the table. There's no reason that your player's character wouldn't do the same, especially if he was confronted with all of the things I've mentioned above. If your players try all of these strategies and he's still just being stubborn, then maybe he's not the kind of player you want in your game for the sake of everyone else.
Wow this is close to home. In the game that I play in, I'm playing a Chaotic Neutral AT with similar predilections for mischief, risky behavior, and selfish instincts. He's definitely put the party at risk multiple times, snuck off to do his own thing to the detriment of the group, and just engaged in general ****ery. I think the the biggest difference between me and your player is that I'm a DM as well and try to be very conscious about how I show up to the table, and I've had multiple out-of-game conversations with the other players to make sure they talk to me if my characters actions ever bother them as players and not simply bother their characters. That said, let me see if I can give you some strategies that my group has used that have yielded positive results:
1: My DM told me right off the bat that my character would need to convince the party to keep him around in the first place.
If this character does reckless and annoying things because "it's what his character would do" then I see no reason why the rest of the party wouldn't abandon him because "it's what their characters would do". This might be harsh, but it could lead to the character rethinking some actions and changing his ways, or possibly it means that your player has to create a new character because his old one was left behind by his party. Worst case scenario, he quits your game, but it honestly sounds like that might be good for your table morale if he's the kind of player you're making him out to be.
2. Encourage your players to talk to him in-game
After several questionable decisions, my party members had (several) in-character conversations about "how we do things as a part of this team". General themes revolved around things like "we share treasure", "we tell each other our plans and strategize as a unit", "we don't do things that would endanger other members of the party", etc... It even went so far that while we were in a library researching how to defeat a monster that we were about to fight, the monk snuck off to see if he could find a book on conflict mediation and has been using strategies from that book to try to approach my character and have these conversations. Taking it as a moment for good roleplay can be effective if that's the kind of group you have.
3. Have an out-of-game conversation to encourage the player to find in-game ways to change
My DM and I are constantly checking with each other to make sure that my character doesn't go too far. As for my part in all of this, I've been really appreciative of the lengths the other characters (and by extension the players) have gone to try to bring my character into the fold. I'm using it as an opportunity for my character to (slowly) become more collaborative in a way that doesn't feel like I'm betraying his chaotic trickster nature but also respects the environment at the table. There's no reason that your player's character wouldn't do the same, especially if he was confronted with all of the things I've mentioned above. If your players try all of these strategies and he's still just being stubborn, then maybe he's not the kind of player you want in your game for the sake of everyone else.
Thanks for your response. Haha, crazy that the two characters are so similar. I especially loved point number 2- try to work it out in game. It makes sense that if the group is at odds, they might part ways. Hopefully they find a way to work it out and use their differences to help each other and the group. Discussing it out of game as players to make sure we understand each other and we're having fun is important, too.
Kind of surprised no one has said this, but it is not solely your responsibility to reign this guy in. Yes, you're the boss of the game, but that doesn't mean you have to do all the hard stuff alone and it doesn't mean you're the only adult at the table. Everyone is responsible for the harmony of the group.
This guy is your brother's friend. If you are anxious about confronting him, consider having your brother play a role in this. I know if I was in your brother's position, I would feel 100% responsible for the issue and would take care of it myself.
Good luck in whatever you decide. If it were my table he would have gotten a talk after the first session and be gone after the second.
1. Let the players have their way as long as they don't abuse it and what they are doing keeps the game fun for everyone. Aka, who cares if he gets a free weapon proficiency? If the other players don't care, neither should you. The game is not balanced around weapon proficiency, being proficient at a scimitar isn't going to change anything important. And the shoulder dislocation thing, why bother making a skill check for that? He is a rogue, it was a cool idea, reward him for it.
I agree with what you said, but (as you mention in point #2) he was making many requests that were disruptive and bogging the game down. The idea about dislocating his wrists to slip out of cuffs, while creative, is unreasonable for a level 2 rogue to accomplish. It would make him too powerful. Allowing him to do that would also send the message that he could easily get out of bad situations he got into. The reason he was taken prisoner was because he tried and failed to assassinate a villain while in the middle of all his guards.
Kind of surprised no one has said this, but it is not solely your responsibility to reign this guy in. Yes, you're the boss of the game, but that doesn't mean you have to do all the hard stuff alone and it doesn't mean you're the only adult at the table. Everyone is responsible for the harmony of the group.
Great point. I'll involve the other players in this and had them share their thoughts, too.
1. Let the players have their way as long as they don't abuse it and what they are doing keeps the game fun for everyone. Aka, who cares if he gets a free weapon proficiency? If the other players don't care, neither should you. The game is not balanced around weapon proficiency, being proficient at a scimitar isn't going to change anything important. And the shoulder dislocation thing, why bother making a skill check for that? He is a rogue, it was a cool idea, reward him for it.
I agree with what you said, but (as you mention in point #2) he was making many requests that were disruptive and bogging the game down. The idea about dislocating his wrists to slip out of cuffs, while creative, is unreasonable for a level 2 rogue to accomplish. It would make him too powerful. Allowing him to do that would also send the message that he could easily get out of bad situations he got into. The reason he was taken prisoner was because he tried and failed to assassinate a villain while in the middle of all his guards.
Im not sure how being Level 2 and dislocating your wrists are related? Level is an abstract notion, it says nothing about a character, it speaks to the rules of the game which have nothing to do with the narrative of the game. Rules is just a machinary their to let us roll some dice when as a DM you don’t feel ruling on it is appropriate.. I don’t really see how dislocating a wrist to get out of some handcuffs makes one ”too powerful” either? A 10d6 Fireball makes you powerful, dislocating your wrist is a useless skill 99% of the time in the game.
Also be really careful regarding DM justification, your an arbitraitor of the world, not a morality judge. What he did to get into the handcuffs is irrelevant to how he gets out of him. I don’t care if you slaughtered a kindergarden class full of Christmas Elves, he doesn’t fail at everything as a punishment for his actions.
You have to be objectively distant from the players actions and impartial in the management of the game, your job is not to judge the players actions and punish them if you dont like what they did.
Your job as a GM is to keep the game balanced, be impartial and let events unfold in a logical, believable fashion with a zesty spirit for the dramatic. When a player comes up with a clever idea.. go with it, don’t get in the way. Thats just healthy advice and if you are uncertain about something, for example.. is he agile enough to get out of the cuffs... by all means make a skill check. But generally you want to avoid skill checks as often as possible else the success and failure of characters adventuring careers boil down to how lucky they are with dice. You want to make sure that the players feel like their ideas matter more than their character stats.
I hear what you're saying. The phrase, "too powerful," was badly placed. He couldn't get out of the cuffs because it didn't logically make sense. To rephrase what I wrote in the original post, I wasn't sure he would be able to get out of the cuffs in the first place, so I had him roll a skill check. When he failed, he complained that he should be able to get out by dislocating his wrists. While what he said is creative, it isn't easy and not believe-able in the situation he was in. It didn't logically make sense, and allowing him to do it because it was a creative idea might give him the idea that he could escape any situation with a creative idea or change the outcome of a dice roll.
I do appreciate your advice about DM justification and being a "morality judge". While this player is has been arguing frequently about the rules, he's still learning the game. It's important not to put crosshairs on him.
You could make him take a cumulative 1 psychic damage per time he argues with you, after waring him or reward other players and not him, though don't be really mean. also, i admittedly did the rapier thing the exact same thing. let him have it but threaten to take i away if he disobeys. i do similar things when dming.
If you are still looking for advice and I am allowed to recommend outside content-there is a pretty solid podcast called Dungeon Master's Block that I'm sure a ton of people on this website have heard of or listened to. One of their first episodes is around how to handle problem players as a Dm and has a ton of good advice.
I haven't had to handle a problem player in DnD but some of the same rules would apply from having to deal with problem co-workers or subordinates. Honesty is certainly the best policy but make sure you are open to feedback in the conversation as well-whether or not you agree- so they can feel listened to and you can keep trust. Hope any of that helps!
As a DM for over 30 years now, (yes I am ancient but still in good condition with low mileage), I have had the opportunity to preside over hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of sessions in all these years. In that time, I have had both phenomenal, wonderful players who are team players, and easy to get along with, to the rotten, selfish, greedy, obnoxious players who quickly found themselves ejected, excommunicated, reviled, and generally outcast from our games. It is a simple equation, my friend. A good player is helpful and friendly, someone who is there to enjoy himself and ensure that others ALSO enjoy themselves. This is why we play this wonderful game. We play to enjoy ourselves.
I always speak to the players and let them know up front, that I am very fair when it comes to the rules, but I am also strict in following them. If the other players are not being affected though, and it's a minor situation, then simply overlook it, as long as everyone is satisfied and okay with the decision. I make sure that this is the case, because the last thing I want, is players harboring resentments and holding on to them. This ruins the campaign over time. On the other hand, if this continually occurs and the person is regularly causing issues, then this becomes a headache for the entire group, most of all, the DM.
If someone is not contributing to the overall good vibe of the game, then they need to leave. Period. End of story. There is no place for those who are social vampires. I will not tolerate those who seek only their glorification and pleasure. Those kinds of people simply detract from the fun of the game. We have enough problems in real life, that we do not need to bring those troubles to our hobby. This is ME time for all of us. I think that sums it up pretty well, don't you? Good luck and happy gaming!!
Hi everyone,
I've been playing 5e for 2 years now and love it. As a DM, I have ran 2 shorter campaigns (to level 5) with no major problems. I just started DMing a larger campaign for my group- the goal is to arrive at level 17 by the end.
One of my players (my brother) recently invited a friend of his and this guy is struggling to "mesh" well with the group. In hindsight, maybe I should've gotten to know the guy a little more before inviting him, but it is what it is. Neither my brother or I could forsee these problems. His (my brother's friend) actions (both as a player and in-game character) are really starting to frustrate the others and myself. It's come to the point where 2 players are talking about quitting. I'm really struggling to know what to do as DM to fix it. As I see it, there are two main issues. For context, he's playing an Arcane Tricker Rogue. Here are the problems as I see them:
1. This player is often arguing the rules even after we explain the rule and the "why". Some examples:
He found a weapon he likes (a scimitar) and wants to become proficient in it automatically (without taking a feat).
He makes a sneak attack while hiding, wants to hide again in the same spot, and then wants another sneak attack.
As a level 2 rogue, he argued that he should be able to escape strong cuffs by "dislocating his wrists and slipping them out" even after he failed the ability check roll to attempt an escape.
There are numerous other examples. These would not be as big a deal if it only happened once or twice and he accepted the rulings. However, it really disrupts the flow of the game when he does it two or three times each session. I've taken a hard stand by not making exceptions to "draw a line in the sand". There's been some improvement.
2. (This issue is the bigger one) In game, this player's character is taking actions that are consistently frustrating the group. Here are some examples:
In the first session, the characters had to save some townspeople and getting there fast was important. The rogue stayed at the back of the group and then snuck off to get to the destination by a different route (supposedly to ambush). I told him it would take him 10 minutes longer by that route, but he insisted. As a result, 2 of the 3 characters that arrived earlier fought in combat were rolling death saves by the time he got there. They narrowly escaped a TPK. He saw himself as the "Savior" because he arrived just in time.
In that same first session, the rogue snuck off and disguised himself as the enemy without talking to the group. Then, in a crowd of 30-50 enemy troops ("I'm in the back of all the troops though" he said), he shot the main villain in the back (I believe I hinted to him it wasn't a good idea and wouldn't work). He tried to use sleight of hand to plant the bow on a nearby soldier and then grapple the same soldier to blame him for doing it. It didn't work and he was taken prisoner. Keep in mind he was level 1. The other players, staying in character, knew he was missing but had no idea where he went. They ended up rescuing him, but it took the whole next session.
When in a cave, he stayed near the back and went to search a room (without the others knowing, of course). I told him it would take 30 minutes to search, but he insisted. It took one of the other characters (when they discovered he was missing) coming back to convince him to come along. Had they not, he would've missed an important encounter (would've been deadly had he not been there).
In every session (we've played 5 or 6 so far), this character has tried to use sleight of hand to plant flowers on the other characters. Once he hit level 3, he started using mage hand legerdemain to plant flowers on them. When he fails, he tries right away again. (This seems silly, but combined with all the other things, the others are just annoyed)
During a session we played online, he left his computer without telling anyone. The party was traveling between cities and was stopping for the night. While he was gone, unknown to us, the group set up a watch schedule. When he came back and found out was happening, he insisted he get first watch. The group informed him they had set a schedule, he said, "Had I been here, I would've wanted first watch." They told him he had third, but he said, "No, I'm challenging you for first watch. Roll." He demanded again and again a dice roll and wouldn't give in. It took another player yelling (I should've stepped in before but didn't realize it would escalate that fast) to get him to give in. But the following nights of the journey he insisted on first watch every time and they gave in just to avoid a problem.
This player often insists things are his way without giving reasons or backing down. The wizard wanted to be in the back of the marching order and had a good reason (he explained to the group he wanted to recall his familiar without others seeing) but the rogue would not let him.
When he's asked why he's doing these things, he says it's, "Part of his character." (For the record, his alignment is Chaotic Neutral which he said he took because it allows him to basically do whatever he wants.
As I mentioned, by themselves any one of these actions wouldn't be a problem at all. It's the combination of all these small things that have annoyed the other players and gotten to the point where any little thing he does (to be silly or contrary to the group) frustrates them. We've tried talking to him to explain the rules and ask him to work with the group. There's been little improvement. As I mentioned, two of the others are thinking about dropping out.
I feel like I need to have a conversation and be blunt with him. Say something like, "Think about this from a story standpoint. Why would the other characters want to have your character around when he's doing these things? This needs to stop now." I don't want to be too heavy handed, though. I want him to be able to have fun with his character, but not at the expense of others.
Being a DM is tough sometimes :(. What should I do? I would appreciate any ideas. Thanks everyone!
As you said, it's fine to play a chaotic neutral character, but that doesn't mean they get to do what they want without consequences. Currently, his character is making enemies and this could have consequences. Also, while he's playing the character, HE doesn't get to be a jerk.
You could ask him to leave the game.
You could have him make a new character (the rest of the party ditches his character after he turns in from first watch or his character may die in combat and the party refuses to revive him or don't have the resources to save him).
There are multiple ways to approach this; what type of solution are you looking for?
Honesty will set you free :) You said just what to do... "I feel like I need to have a conversation and be blunt with him."
Being a DM can be hard that way but here's the thing to remember. As the DM you are orchestrating a group experience. If gameplay was fine before this new player came into the group then you need to wrangle him in or cut him loose. Sounds like you and the other players are gaming on a different level than he is. So if you want him to continue playing you have to bring him up to your level of play. Sounds like he thought "Oh, yeah, sure I can play D&D. I just get to do whatever I want, It's a fantasy game right?" But just like any other game it has rules.
That's what happens when you wear a helmet your whole life!
My house rules
Yeah, have an open talk with him. Explain to him that not only are you the DM and your word is final, but he is disrupting the game for the other players. Tell him he is on his last strike and one more disruption will have him ejected from the game. If he has an issue with that, eject him immediately.
D&D is a social game and isn't about one person.
And you could always do what I did. We had a rogue who liked to split the group and run off on her own, to the point where the party was discovering an important plot point, and she was over 1500 feet away and walked face first into a Chimera. 5th level rogue vs Chimera. Guess how that fight went? The player learned her lesson.
Yes to this! Sounds like what you probably should do.
There is however a few things in what you write I have a litte difficulty to understand what you as a DM did to "avoid" this:
He disguised in a crowd of 30-50 enemy troops and tried to shoot the big bad guy. OK, you said to him that it was a bad plan (although to me it sounds quite good), but if it was such a bad plan, why don't have him attacked by 50 enemies? Why capture him instead?
If he is insisting on searching a cave for 30 minutes (it sounds like your decision it took that long), just throw the encounter on the other players. Have him sit out and watch. When the encounter is finished, have him make his perception roll. And, no encounter is deadly if a player is missing. That is your choice as a DM, simply make it slightly easier.
But, it sounds like he could need a little pep talk, but also consider why you are telling him it takes that long to search a room, or why his ideas are so bad. (They might have been, but some of your examples actually doesn't sound that "bad" when you read them.)
Ludo ergo sum!
Thanks for the responses everyone. I figured talking to him directly is the right thing to do. Avoiding it is not going to fix it though, and the other players will just harbor bad feelings.
Wow this is close to home. In the game that I play in, I'm playing a Chaotic Neutral AT with similar predilections for mischief, risky behavior, and selfish instincts. He's definitely put the party at risk multiple times, snuck off to do his own thing to the detriment of the group, and just engaged in general ****ery. I think the the biggest difference between me and your player is that I'm a DM as well and try to be very conscious about how I show up to the table, and I've had multiple out-of-game conversations with the other players to make sure they talk to me if my characters actions ever bother them as players and not simply bother their characters. That said, let me see if I can give you some strategies that my group has used that have yielded positive results:
1: My DM told me right off the bat that my character would need to convince the party to keep him around in the first place.
If this character does reckless and annoying things because "it's what his character would do" then I see no reason why the rest of the party wouldn't abandon him because "it's what their characters would do". This might be harsh, but it could lead to the character rethinking some actions and changing his ways, or possibly it means that your player has to create a new character because his old one was left behind by his party. Worst case scenario, he quits your game, but it honestly sounds like that might be good for your table morale if he's the kind of player you're making him out to be.
2. Encourage your players to talk to him in-game
After several questionable decisions, my party members had (several) in-character conversations about "how we do things as a part of this team". General themes revolved around things like "we share treasure", "we tell each other our plans and strategize as a unit", "we don't do things that would endanger other members of the party", etc... It even went so far that while we were in a library researching how to defeat a monster that we were about to fight, the monk snuck off to see if he could find a book on conflict mediation and has been using strategies from that book to try to approach my character and have these conversations. Taking it as a moment for good roleplay can be effective if that's the kind of group you have.
3. Have an out-of-game conversation to encourage the player to find in-game ways to change
My DM and I are constantly checking with each other to make sure that my character doesn't go too far. As for my part in all of this, I've been really appreciative of the lengths the other characters (and by extension the players) have gone to try to bring my character into the fold. I'm using it as an opportunity for my character to (slowly) become more collaborative in a way that doesn't feel like I'm betraying his chaotic trickster nature but also respects the environment at the table. There's no reason that your player's character wouldn't do the same, especially if he was confronted with all of the things I've mentioned above. If your players try all of these strategies and he's still just being stubborn, then maybe he's not the kind of player you want in your game for the sake of everyone else.
"To die would be an awfully big adventure"
Thanks for your response. Haha, crazy that the two characters are so similar. I especially loved point number 2- try to work it out in game. It makes sense that if the group is at odds, they might part ways. Hopefully they find a way to work it out and use their differences to help each other and the group. Discussing it out of game as players to make sure we understand each other and we're having fun is important, too.
Again, this is amazing advice. Thank you!
Kind of surprised no one has said this, but it is not solely your responsibility to reign this guy in. Yes, you're the boss of the game, but that doesn't mean you have to do all the hard stuff alone and it doesn't mean you're the only adult at the table. Everyone is responsible for the harmony of the group.
This guy is your brother's friend. If you are anxious about confronting him, consider having your brother play a role in this. I know if I was in your brother's position, I would feel 100% responsible for the issue and would take care of it myself.
Good luck in whatever you decide. If it were my table he would have gotten a talk after the first session and be gone after the second.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I agree with what you said, but (as you mention in point #2) he was making many requests that were disruptive and bogging the game down. The idea about dislocating his wrists to slip out of cuffs, while creative, is unreasonable for a level 2 rogue to accomplish. It would make him too powerful. Allowing him to do that would also send the message that he could easily get out of bad situations he got into. The reason he was taken prisoner was because he tried and failed to assassinate a villain while in the middle of all his guards.
Great point. I'll involve the other players in this and had them share their thoughts, too.
I hear what you're saying. The phrase, "too powerful," was badly placed. He couldn't get out of the cuffs because it didn't logically make sense. To rephrase what I wrote in the original post, I wasn't sure he would be able to get out of the cuffs in the first place, so I had him roll a skill check. When he failed, he complained that he should be able to get out by dislocating his wrists. While what he said is creative, it isn't easy and not believe-able in the situation he was in. It didn't logically make sense, and allowing him to do it because it was a creative idea might give him the idea that he could escape any situation with a creative idea or change the outcome of a dice roll.
I do appreciate your advice about DM justification and being a "morality judge". While this player is has been arguing frequently about the rules, he's still learning the game. It's important not to put crosshairs on him.
You could make him take a cumulative 1 psychic damage per time he argues with you, after waring him or reward other players and not him, though don't be really mean. also, i admittedly did the rapier thing the exact same thing. let him have it but threaten to take i away if he disobeys. i do similar things when dming.
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.
If you are still looking for advice and I am allowed to recommend outside content-there is a pretty solid podcast called Dungeon Master's Block that I'm sure a ton of people on this website have heard of or listened to. One of their first episodes is around how to handle problem players as a Dm and has a ton of good advice.
I haven't had to handle a problem player in DnD but some of the same rules would apply from having to deal with problem co-workers or subordinates. Honesty is certainly the best policy but make sure you are open to feedback in the conversation as well-whether or not you agree- so they can feel listened to and you can keep trust. Hope any of that helps!
As a DM for over 30 years now, (yes I am ancient but still in good condition with low mileage), I have had the opportunity to preside over hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of sessions in all these years. In that time, I have had both phenomenal, wonderful players who are team players, and easy to get along with, to the rotten, selfish, greedy, obnoxious players who quickly found themselves ejected, excommunicated, reviled, and generally outcast from our games. It is a simple equation, my friend. A good player is helpful and friendly, someone who is there to enjoy himself and ensure that others ALSO enjoy themselves. This is why we play this wonderful game. We play to enjoy ourselves.
I always speak to the players and let them know up front, that I am very fair when it comes to the rules, but I am also strict in following them. If the other players are not being affected though, and it's a minor situation, then simply overlook it, as long as everyone is satisfied and okay with the decision. I make sure that this is the case, because the last thing I want, is players harboring resentments and holding on to them. This ruins the campaign over time. On the other hand, if this continually occurs and the person is regularly causing issues, then this becomes a headache for the entire group, most of all, the DM.
If someone is not contributing to the overall good vibe of the game, then they need to leave. Period. End of story. There is no place for those who are social vampires. I will not tolerate those who seek only their glorification and pleasure. Those kinds of people simply detract from the fun of the game. We have enough problems in real life, that we do not need to bring those troubles to our hobby. This is ME time for all of us. I think that sums it up pretty well, don't you? Good luck and happy gaming!!