Kick him from the game, he has no respect for you or your campaign. There is no reason to let him continue to play that can't be overcome with a little thinking.
Kick him from the game, he has no respect for you or your campaign. There is no reason to let him continue to play that can't be overcome with a little thinking.
While I'm not a fan of "let me be a sociopath" character requests, from what's been described by the OP I don't think this dynamic is as irredeemable as "boot 'em."
To be fair, the DM is still writing the world and the game hasn't started, it doesn't even sound like there's been a session 0, maybe not even a stable player roster. So, sure we could follow the advice that ignores the pre-existing friendship in the calculus. But kicking a player who's also a friend because they "don't get" what admittedly hasn't really been fully fleshed out yet, that smacks of some old school "authoritarian"* style communication/executive function which generally just results in hurt feelings within the friendship dynamic ... to be short unnecessarily toxic. There's probably a lot more to this friendship than D&D, so let's not be so presumptive with our declarations.
I'd recommend dropping, or not even picking up, the authoritarian "I say you're out" trappings and go for something more productively authoritative (it is your world, but you want the world to be enjoyed and you can guide without dictating, you can really deep dive into the "authoritarian/authoritative/permissive/negligent" classifications executive/leadership/nurturing styles ... it's actually really useful for DMing, especially for DMs who struggle with "personality" issues, way more useful than that Meyers-Briggs navel gazing). Next time he "submits" another character who would just be dysfunctional in your game, adapt this script, "Hey, friend, I really appreciate your enthusiasm for playing in the world I'm working on. Here's the thing though, serial killers, creepy necromancers, all that stuff ... they aren't fitting in the game I'm running. What I want to see are characters who are team players, and your concepts aren't really connected to that. Camraderie, honor, integrity are going to be essential concepts to contend with the challenges my game world will pose the party, so I need character builds that are more party invested. Why don't you hold off on further character submissions until I'm done designing the campaign. We'll do a session 0, sort of a prologue where I explain the world and then, as a table we'll build characters designed to work with each other." Laying it out clear like that puts the choice on them. You've done your best (with your design actually finished) to introduce them to the world, and if they still don't get it, then apologize and offer them a pregen that works and give them that last call choice.
To be fair, Session 0 isn't codified in present D&D until Tasha's which the player in question may or may not have access to. Per the PHB, the guidance leans to make a character, bring it to a game, and have fun. In a friendship, misunderstandings can be worked through, and this sounds like it doesn't need to be a heavy lift.
You could also push back saying, "And what do you mean serial killer? I mean a serial killer is generally anti-social and spends as much time stalking their victims to the degree that they don't really have time to be part of an adventuring party. Actual serial killer archetypes make horrible party members and my D&D is a team sport. If you mean you just want to kill a lot, like maybe you could consider yourself a mass murderer, but usually in D&D terms we call that a murderhobo, and my game world can't really accommodate one. A character who just goes around killing people will be seized by authorities and either imprisoned or executed. So, what sort of character do you think would work?"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I totally agree! The situation isn't even close to the point of having the need to kick him out of the game, we are really close so I'm sure I can make him understand that the type of idea he has doesn't fit the theme of my campaign, he can get a bit ahead of himself since as I said I'm not done writing the setting so I kind of struggled.
Sadly I literally cannot please him with his request of a "serial killer" since in my setting killing is highly illegal and they have the means to track him down with ease, and the thing is that the "serial killer" part isn't even the worst of it! He wanted to make a serial killer, necromancer cannibal who can see the spirits of whom he killed... Like, my setting is supposed to be somewhat realistic and politic based so all this is just too much, I mean it could be a cool concept if taken in the right context/setting but in my campaign it doesn't fit AT ALL.
Aside from that we DO have a full party of people waiting to play my setting (we are always the same group of friends, we all know each other) but yeah we didn't even had a session 0 so it's all still a work in progress.
Thank you all for the answers!! It's super appreciated!
The big problem isn't the type of character (being a serial killer), it's honoring the spirit of the campaign. As a DM, you set expectations at the table for your players. Your players should reciprocate that. It's not that you should force them to play certain ways- players only have control over their characters, so giving them freedom is important. But if you're running a political intrigue sci-fi steampunk setting, and your players bring a horror movie slasher villain to the party, then they are trying to tell a different story.
If it's not disruptive, I usually let players bend the envelopes a bit. You don't have to do a perfect match for the genre, but it does help to be adherent to the basic concepts. One thing that I've seen done is recommending media examples (TV shows, movies, games, etc.) that have a similar feeling to what you want from the campaign. If your players have that expectation and inspiration, they will likely make characters that more closely match what you're looking for than if you just throw a couple genre tags their way and hope they end up close to what you want.
That said, if a player consistently makes a disruptive character that is antagonistic to the party, you may need to just pull them aside and tell them something like "Hey, I'm sorry, but these characters aren't working. Your characters' don't have any motivation to work with the party, and that makes my job as a DM a lot harder. I understand that there are certain types of characters you may want to play, but this campaign will work a lot more smoothly if everyone is on the same page." It won't guarantee that your player will make better characters for the group, but it won't hurt (other than perhaps a bit of awkwardness) and even if they do make a character who is of a different theme, if they at least have a motivation they can share with their party members they might be willing to reign in some of the disruptive behavior to work with the party.
Why do so many players want to play serial killers and the like? It's creepy af.
Again, we're not clear on what the prospective player meant by "serial killer." A la actual serial killer as clinically defined which would be near impossible to play as a member of a party unless the whole party was in on it, a la Leatherface's family or those Rob Zombie movies (though both of those aren't clinical but Hollywood) ... or just what is more commonly called a murderhobo.
There's a lot of reasons folks may want to indulge in an anti-social personality in a TTRPG. It's arguably or has been argued to be cathartic, blowing off steam style play which can happen. More often it's a maturity thing, young folks don't have a lot autonomy and will sometimes engage in antisocial behavior (and arguably more healthily fantasy) to lash out at those pressures. In my experience, the by and large folks who want to engage in anti-social or sociopathic behaviors can usually be shrugged off and coaxed into more social play, the antisocial persona adoption is sort of defense mechanism or armor against the sort of vulnerability most fantasy role play leans toward if not encourages in RP. Very few actually have the sort of "problem" that would suggest the need for intervention beyond just saying "dude, wtf, no" at the table. Again, at least in my experience.
Decades ago, I think in the academic journal Postmodern Culture there was an essay called "F*** Art, Let's Kill" about groups in MUSHes and similar virtual communities (predominantly text based this was before MMORG got graphics and second life wasn't a thing) who would basically wreck others creative endeavors. I half remember there being a lot of political romanticizing of this "terrorism" by the scholar, but it largely serves that there's this "type" in any creative space that prefers to make a mess of things rather than integrate with an order of things. It's sort of laughable in a TTRPG place since the GM basically plays in god mode and can actually impose the power/order "ordnering" that the player is trying to flaunt, as opposed to virtual spaces where the conduct is harder to police (though I believe the TTRPG conduct predates the virtual conduct by decades).
Why do so many players want to play serial killers and the like? It's creepy af.
It hasn't been common in my experience. It's mainly something I hear about in forums like this.
Sure we've had anti-heroes but, in almost every case, players have still bought into something like the "right the wrongs" philosophy of most prewritten games.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
I'm going to present an opposing viewpoint. Why not let him play an evil serial murderer? In real life, such a person would need to be careful and hide their actions from the world. They couldn't just kill indiscriminately in the streets because people would stop them. Evil isn't disruptive if evil is smart. Evil that exists within a good-aligned society must be smart, otherwise, it be-s dead.
Good characters can still be disruptive because it's not the character played, it's the player who is disruptive. Do you think a person who seems to really want to play a bad guy is suddenly going to be not disruptive because you made him write lawful good on his character sheet?
You should try to accommodate him because that's what friends do. After all, there are plenty of examples of evil characters travelling with good parties. Raistlin Majere was chaotic evil and he was arguably the most popular member of the heroes of the lance. Actually, playing a serial murderer shouldn't even be that much of an imposition. After all, like 60% of D&D is killing things.
I'm going to present an opposing viewpoint. Why not let him play an evil serial murderer? In real life, such a person would need to be careful and hide their actions from the world. They couldn't just kill indiscriminately in the streets because people would stop them. Evil isn't disruptive if evil is smart. Evil that exists within a good-aligned society must be smart, otherwise, it be-s dead.
Good characters can still be disruptive because it's not the character played, it's the player who is disruptive. Do you think a person who seems to really want to play a bad guy is suddenly going to be not disruptive because you made him write lawful good on his character sheet?
You should try to accommodate him because that's what friends do. After all, there are plenty of examples of evil characters travelling with good parties. Raistlin Majere was chaotic evil and he was arguably the most popular member of the heroes of the lance. Actually, playing a serial murderer shouldn't even be that much of an imposition. After all, like 60% of D&D is killing things.
To counter your counterpoint: sure, a serial killer might not be a problem in-world. But it could definitely be a problem for the group dynamic, especially if other people are expecting a heroic campaign where friends work together and don't keep secrets from each other.
Besides, hiding actions from the group automatically takes time and spotlight away from the other players and the DM's story. And one of two things happens. Either, the evil murderer is discovered and the character stops being playable. Everyone is a upset because now the story is derailed. Or, the evil murderer is never discovered, and that's unsatisfying, because it leaves everyone asking "what was the point of him being an evil murderer in the first place?" Everyone is upset, either because they lost playtime for no payoff, or because his evil murderer never really felt like an evil murderer.
Good characters are built to interact with the rest of the group, not shy away from them.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Did you see the "more than likely" or make up 5% of the population, you can go to a number of psych studies and get varying numbers of who you run into. I go with the higher number, I'm sure you like going with the 1% number. And something else you need to understand, there are plenty of perfectly nice sociopaths you are interacting with today, probably one of your closest friends or family member is and you aren't aware of it. In certain cases they become toxic. And notice I put in "warning light". Its generally not a normal individual who wants to go around being a serial killer, its right up there for warning lights if a player wants to be a serial rapist or a pedophile. Generally killing orcs is more than enough for someone to take out their agressions, but needing to kill the barmaid at night, that ain't normal cheery table play.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Did you see the "more than likely" or make up 5% of the population, you can go to a number of psych studies and get varying numbers of who you run into. I go with the higher number, I'm sure you like going with the 1% number. And something else you need to understand, there are plenty of perfectly nice sociopaths you are interacting with today, probably one of your closest friends or family member is and you aren't aware of it. In certain cases they become toxic. And notice I put in "warning light". Its generally not a normal individual who wants to go around killing characters.
Mate, I took a class in psychopathology and I have no idea where you're getting these ideas. I'm gonna trust the expert professors over the random "fact" peddler on the internet. Conduct disorder kids (psychopathy isn't a proper diagnosis until a certain age) set cats on fire and awful stuff like that. Wanting to play an evil character is perfectly normal.
I’m gonna weigh in on this. I had to stop playing with a lifelong friend of the last 36 years because he just didn’t want to actually play dungeons and dragons, he just wanted to have a place to vent his spleen amongst friends. The problem was, his venting would detonate the game with disruptive behavior, digression, and finally just irritating anyone who didn’t want to talk about his problems.
He and I are still friends because DnD isn’t life, it’s just DnD. If you’re friend isn’t your friend unless you let him act a fool in a DnD game, I’m thinking he needs more help than a DnD game can give, have him go get that help instead of blow up your game.
I'm going to present an opposing viewpoint. Why not let him play an evil serial murderer? In real life, such a person would need to be careful and hide their actions from the world. They couldn't just kill indiscriminately in the streets because people would stop them. Evil isn't disruptive if evil is smart. Evil that exists within a good-aligned society must be smart, otherwise, it be-s dead.
Good characters can still be disruptive because it's not the character played, it's the player who is disruptive. Do you think a person who seems to really want to play a bad guy is suddenly going to be not disruptive because you made him write lawful good on his character sheet?
You should try to accommodate him because that's what friends do. After all, there are plenty of examples of evil characters travelling with good parties. Raistlin Majere was chaotic evil and he was arguably the most popular member of the heroes of the lance. Actually, playing a serial murderer shouldn't even be that much of an imposition. After all, like 60% of D&D is killing things.
I still think the player has to ultimately defer to dynamics the DM is willing to support, and those are dynamics that can be coached, especially since, at least as I'm inferring, it seems the player is spitballing concepts and may. just lack information on how the characters are supposed to come together.
But to take up your thinking, to start with 60% of D&D is killing things. Let's grant you that, I know you're just ball parking a figure so it's "substantial" and I don't think we need to quibble on an exact number and just agree that killing stuff is part of the game. The problem with using that notion as license for a "serial killer" PC (whatever that may mean) is that while D&D may be more tolerant to "killing" that most modern civilizations, there still is a boundary between sanctioned and unsanctioned killing. Clearly the DM sees their game in a world where the PCs would be on the "side of right" (and yes, the righteousness of the world can be questioned, inserting Ted Bundy as a Whisper Bard into the party isn't the way though) and the violence it engaged in would be sanctioned, a sort of license to kill (to be ambiguous since James Bonds own psychopathy is often put under the microscope, even to some degree by Flemming). Serial killers, being beset with a wash of clinical antisocial disorders don't recognize that line and draw their own ... at least the one's who think they're in control of their actions ... many also speak of their conduct through a dissociative lens, pulp literarily this is riffed on by the "dark passenger" Dexter contends with. So you have a (defective) personality type in this character who has either grandiose or dissociative senses of self as they kill by their own rules or compulsions ... and that's somehow supposed to be integrated into a party? Yes there are games that "unreal" the world enough where Edgelords and psychotics can function as an integrated unit as they murderhobo with literal moral abandon so that the game is 66.7% killing (leaving 33.3% for long rests ;) ... but that requires the DM to literally entertain the notion, and that's just not the case with this particular game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Did you see the "more than likely" or make up 5% of the population, you can go to a number of psych studies and get varying numbers of who you run into. I go with the higher number, I'm sure you like going with the 1% number. And something else you need to understand, there are plenty of perfectly nice sociopaths you are interacting with today, probably one of your closest friends or family member is and you aren't aware of it. In certain cases they become toxic. And notice I put in "warning light". Its generally not a normal individual who wants to go around killing characters.
Mate, I took a class in psychopathology and I have no idea where you're getting these ideas. I'm gonna trust the expert professors over the random "fact" peddler on the internet. Conduct disorder kids (psychopathy isn't a proper diagnosis until a certain age) set cats on fire and awful stuff like that. Wanting to play an evil character is perfectly normal.
I'm going off the DSM, there are going to be different estimates by psychological experts, that field is more of an art than a science, its a range dude. I went with 5% which isn't max and certainly not minimum.
As to normal, if someone wants to play evil, sure they tend to want to be greedy or kill someone who gets in their way, ok most campaigns can deal with it, but eventually the party will kill the guy for being an ******* screwing everything up getting wanted posters for the campaign. Its abnormal to want to play someone who is a serial killer. At the very least, put him in as an lycanthrope or undead to explain the need to feed or put them in as a future NPC and to be a future villain (players do like that, especially if they can uncover the guy is a serial killer), anything to give it a reason, rather than go "I just like to kill innocent people, its fun!". I'm not going to roleplay that crap for a sick puppy in the head. ****, Serial Killers and Pedophile RP's are an immediate boot in my campaign, those are some dark thought's F that crap, I don't want those people near me.
I'm going to present an opposing viewpoint. Why not let him play an evil serial murderer? In real life, such a person would need to be careful and hide their actions from the world. They couldn't just kill indiscriminately in the streets because people would stop them. Evil isn't disruptive if evil is smart. Evil that exists within a good-aligned society must be smart, otherwise, it be-s dead.
Good characters can still be disruptive because it's not the character played, it's the player who is disruptive. Do you think a person who seems to really want to play a bad guy is suddenly going to be not disruptive because you made him write lawful good on his character sheet?
You should try to accommodate him because that's what friends do. After all, there are plenty of examples of evil characters travelling with good parties. Raistlin Majere was chaotic evil and he was arguably the most popular member of the heroes of the lance. Actually, playing a serial murderer shouldn't even be that much of an imposition. After all, like 60% of D&D is killing things.
To counter your counterpoint: sure, a serial killer might not be a problem in-world. But it could definitely be a problem for the group dynamic, especially if other people are expecting a heroic campaign where friends work together and don't keep secrets from each other.
Besides, hiding actions from the group automatically takes time and spotlight away from the other players and the DM's story. And one of two things happens. Either, the evil murderer is discovered and the character stops being playable. Everyone is a upset because now the story is derailed. Or, the evil murderer is never discovered, and that's unsatisfying, because it leaves everyone asking "what was the point of him being an evil murderer in the first place?" Everyone is upset, either because they lost playtime for no payoff, or because his evil murderer never really felt like an evil murderer.
Good characters are built to interact with the rest of the group, not shy away from them.
Yeah! I totally agree! In the end he understood and he's now waiting for me to finish writing the story so he can build something that could work with the rest of the party
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Yeah I guess I can KINDA understand where they're coming from but I swear my friend is such a sweetheart he just can get ahead of himself but we care a lot for eachother! But tbh this thread is being kind of amazing I LOVE to hear advice from everyone! It's super helpful and it made me feel better as a DM, so much so that I did in fact talk with my friend and we sorted things out! He still need to make a character but he understood that he needs to wait since I'm still writing the background of the world!
Thanks again for all the replies!!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Kick him from the game, he has no respect for you or your campaign. There is no reason to let him continue to play that can't be overcome with a little thinking.
While I'm not a fan of "let me be a sociopath" character requests, from what's been described by the OP I don't think this dynamic is as irredeemable as "boot 'em."
To be fair, the DM is still writing the world and the game hasn't started, it doesn't even sound like there's been a session 0, maybe not even a stable player roster. So, sure we could follow the advice that ignores the pre-existing friendship in the calculus. But kicking a player who's also a friend because they "don't get" what admittedly hasn't really been fully fleshed out yet, that smacks of some old school "authoritarian"* style communication/executive function which generally just results in hurt feelings within the friendship dynamic ... to be short unnecessarily toxic. There's probably a lot more to this friendship than D&D, so let's not be so presumptive with our declarations.
I'd recommend dropping, or not even picking up, the authoritarian "I say you're out" trappings and go for something more productively authoritative (it is your world, but you want the world to be enjoyed and you can guide without dictating, you can really deep dive into the "authoritarian/authoritative/permissive/negligent" classifications executive/leadership/nurturing styles ... it's actually really useful for DMing, especially for DMs who struggle with "personality" issues, way more useful than that Meyers-Briggs navel gazing). Next time he "submits" another character who would just be dysfunctional in your game, adapt this script, "Hey, friend, I really appreciate your enthusiasm for playing in the world I'm working on. Here's the thing though, serial killers, creepy necromancers, all that stuff ... they aren't fitting in the game I'm running. What I want to see are characters who are team players, and your concepts aren't really connected to that. Camraderie, honor, integrity are going to be essential concepts to contend with the challenges my game world will pose the party, so I need character builds that are more party invested. Why don't you hold off on further character submissions until I'm done designing the campaign. We'll do a session 0, sort of a prologue where I explain the world and then, as a table we'll build characters designed to work with each other." Laying it out clear like that puts the choice on them. You've done your best (with your design actually finished) to introduce them to the world, and if they still don't get it, then apologize and offer them a pregen that works and give them that last call choice.
To be fair, Session 0 isn't codified in present D&D until Tasha's which the player in question may or may not have access to. Per the PHB, the guidance leans to make a character, bring it to a game, and have fun. In a friendship, misunderstandings can be worked through, and this sounds like it doesn't need to be a heavy lift.
You could also push back saying, "And what do you mean serial killer? I mean a serial killer is generally anti-social and spends as much time stalking their victims to the degree that they don't really have time to be part of an adventuring party. Actual serial killer archetypes make horrible party members and my D&D is a team sport. If you mean you just want to kill a lot, like maybe you could consider yourself a mass murderer, but usually in D&D terms we call that a murderhobo, and my game world can't really accommodate one. A character who just goes around killing people will be seized by authorities and either imprisoned or executed. So, what sort of character do you think would work?"
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I totally agree! The situation isn't even close to the point of having the need to kick him out of the game, we are really close so I'm sure I can make him understand that the type of idea he has doesn't fit the theme of my campaign, he can get a bit ahead of himself since as I said I'm not done writing the setting so I kind of struggled.
Sadly I literally cannot please him with his request of a "serial killer" since in my setting killing is highly illegal and they have the means to track him down with ease, and the thing is that the "serial killer" part isn't even the worst of it! He wanted to make a serial killer, necromancer cannibal who can see the spirits of whom he killed... Like, my setting is supposed to be somewhat realistic and politic based so all this is just too much, I mean it could be a cool concept if taken in the right context/setting but in my campaign it doesn't fit AT ALL.
Aside from that we DO have a full party of people waiting to play my setting (we are always the same group of friends, we all know each other) but yeah we didn't even had a session 0 so it's all still a work in progress.
Thank you all for the answers!! It's super appreciated!
The big problem isn't the type of character (being a serial killer), it's honoring the spirit of the campaign. As a DM, you set expectations at the table for your players. Your players should reciprocate that. It's not that you should force them to play certain ways- players only have control over their characters, so giving them freedom is important. But if you're running a political intrigue sci-fi steampunk setting, and your players bring a horror movie slasher villain to the party, then they are trying to tell a different story.
If it's not disruptive, I usually let players bend the envelopes a bit. You don't have to do a perfect match for the genre, but it does help to be adherent to the basic concepts. One thing that I've seen done is recommending media examples (TV shows, movies, games, etc.) that have a similar feeling to what you want from the campaign. If your players have that expectation and inspiration, they will likely make characters that more closely match what you're looking for than if you just throw a couple genre tags their way and hope they end up close to what you want.
That said, if a player consistently makes a disruptive character that is antagonistic to the party, you may need to just pull them aside and tell them something like "Hey, I'm sorry, but these characters aren't working. Your characters' don't have any motivation to work with the party, and that makes my job as a DM a lot harder. I understand that there are certain types of characters you may want to play, but this campaign will work a lot more smoothly if everyone is on the same page." It won't guarantee that your player will make better characters for the group, but it won't hurt (other than perhaps a bit of awkwardness) and even if they do make a character who is of a different theme, if they at least have a motivation they can share with their party members they might be willing to reign in some of the disruptive behavior to work with the party.
Why do so many players want to play serial killers and the like? It's creepy af.
Again, we're not clear on what the prospective player meant by "serial killer." A la actual serial killer as clinically defined which would be near impossible to play as a member of a party unless the whole party was in on it, a la Leatherface's family or those Rob Zombie movies (though both of those aren't clinical but Hollywood) ... or just what is more commonly called a murderhobo.
There's a lot of reasons folks may want to indulge in an anti-social personality in a TTRPG. It's arguably or has been argued to be cathartic, blowing off steam style play which can happen. More often it's a maturity thing, young folks don't have a lot autonomy and will sometimes engage in antisocial behavior (and arguably more healthily fantasy) to lash out at those pressures. In my experience, the by and large folks who want to engage in anti-social or sociopathic behaviors can usually be shrugged off and coaxed into more social play, the antisocial persona adoption is sort of defense mechanism or armor against the sort of vulnerability most fantasy role play leans toward if not encourages in RP. Very few actually have the sort of "problem" that would suggest the need for intervention beyond just saying "dude, wtf, no" at the table. Again, at least in my experience.
Decades ago, I think in the academic journal Postmodern Culture there was an essay called "F*** Art, Let's Kill" about groups in MUSHes and similar virtual communities (predominantly text based this was before MMORG got graphics and second life wasn't a thing) who would basically wreck others creative endeavors. I half remember there being a lot of political romanticizing of this "terrorism" by the scholar, but it largely serves that there's this "type" in any creative space that prefers to make a mess of things rather than integrate with an order of things. It's sort of laughable in a TTRPG place since the GM basically plays in god mode and can actually impose the power/order "ordnering" that the player is trying to flaunt, as opposed to virtual spaces where the conduct is harder to police (though I believe the TTRPG conduct predates the virtual conduct by decades).
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
It hasn't been common in my experience. It's mainly something I hear about in forums like this.
Sure we've had anti-heroes but, in almost every case, players have still bought into something like the "right the wrongs" philosophy of most prewritten games.
Because sociopaths/psychopaths tend to be very smart and they make up 5% of the population. The guys friend is more than likely one of them. They aren't always going out of their way to destroy someone and they can simulate friendship, but when someone goes into wanting to kill people in a campaign, it always puts on the warning lights for the guy. There are plenty of functioning sociopaths in society, and a sociopath would manipulate someone into getting them to do something they don't want to do.
I'm going to present an opposing viewpoint. Why not let him play an evil serial murderer? In real life, such a person would need to be careful and hide their actions from the world. They couldn't just kill indiscriminately in the streets because people would stop them. Evil isn't disruptive if evil is smart. Evil that exists within a good-aligned society must be smart, otherwise, it be-s dead.
Good characters can still be disruptive because it's not the character played, it's the player who is disruptive. Do you think a person who seems to really want to play a bad guy is suddenly going to be not disruptive because you made him write lawful good on his character sheet?
You should try to accommodate him because that's what friends do. After all, there are plenty of examples of evil characters travelling with good parties. Raistlin Majere was chaotic evil and he was arguably the most popular member of the heroes of the lance. Actually, playing a serial murderer shouldn't even be that much of an imposition. After all, like 60% of D&D is killing things.
To counter your counterpoint: sure, a serial killer might not be a problem in-world. But it could definitely be a problem for the group dynamic, especially if other people are expecting a heroic campaign where friends work together and don't keep secrets from each other.
Besides, hiding actions from the group automatically takes time and spotlight away from the other players and the DM's story. And one of two things happens. Either, the evil murderer is discovered and the character stops being playable. Everyone is a upset because now the story is derailed. Or, the evil murderer is never discovered, and that's unsatisfying, because it leaves everyone asking "what was the point of him being an evil murderer in the first place?" Everyone is upset, either because they lost playtime for no payoff, or because his evil murderer never really felt like an evil murderer.
Good characters are built to interact with the rest of the group, not shy away from them.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Way to take a factoid of dubious accuracy "5% [of what] population are sociopaths/psychopaths [because there isn't a clear distinction between the two, or rather you aren't aware there is]" and throw at a query where if you read the behavior as reported you're not seeing anything like sociopathic or psychopathic behavior in the description, as opposed to just adolescent behavior.
Really, let's not throw around clinical terms unless we have some actual facility with them. Have you ever done a clinical or forensic interview or intake? If you had, you wouldn't be so glib in your "assistance." There's a lot of pop psych out there teaching folks how to "eyeball" a sociopath/psychopath/narcissist. IRL, and keep in mind we're talking about real people here not fictional constructs in a game, it's actually a lot harder to assess and evaluate personality disorders of these natures. Most of this thread is productive engagement strategies for a DM-player communication dynamic ... but there's a knee jerk minority that can only see it as pathological. I sorta feel bad for the OP being made uncomfortable about their friendships.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Did you see the "more than likely" or make up 5% of the population, you can go to a number of psych studies and get varying numbers of who you run into. I go with the higher number, I'm sure you like going with the 1% number. And something else you need to understand, there are plenty of perfectly nice sociopaths you are interacting with today, probably one of your closest friends or family member is and you aren't aware of it. In certain cases they become toxic. And notice I put in "warning light". Its generally not a normal individual who wants to go around being a serial killer, its right up there for warning lights if a player wants to be a serial rapist or a pedophile. Generally killing orcs is more than enough for someone to take out their agressions, but needing to kill the barmaid at night, that ain't normal cheery table play.
Mate, I took a class in psychopathology and I have no idea where you're getting these ideas. I'm gonna trust the expert professors over the random "fact" peddler on the internet. Conduct disorder kids (psychopathy isn't a proper diagnosis until a certain age) set cats on fire and awful stuff like that. Wanting to play an evil character is perfectly normal.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I’m gonna weigh in on this. I had to stop playing with a lifelong friend of the last 36 years because he just didn’t want to actually play dungeons and dragons, he just wanted to have a place to vent his spleen amongst friends. The problem was, his venting would detonate the game with disruptive behavior, digression, and finally just irritating anyone who didn’t want to talk about his problems.
He and I are still friends because DnD isn’t life, it’s just DnD. If you’re friend isn’t your friend unless you let him act a fool in a DnD game, I’m thinking he needs more help than a DnD game can give, have him go get that help instead of blow up your game.
I still think the player has to ultimately defer to dynamics the DM is willing to support, and those are dynamics that can be coached, especially since, at least as I'm inferring, it seems the player is spitballing concepts and may. just lack information on how the characters are supposed to come together.
But to take up your thinking, to start with 60% of D&D is killing things. Let's grant you that, I know you're just ball parking a figure so it's "substantial" and I don't think we need to quibble on an exact number and just agree that killing stuff is part of the game. The problem with using that notion as license for a "serial killer" PC (whatever that may mean) is that while D&D may be more tolerant to "killing" that most modern civilizations, there still is a boundary between sanctioned and unsanctioned killing. Clearly the DM sees their game in a world where the PCs would be on the "side of right" (and yes, the righteousness of the world can be questioned, inserting Ted Bundy as a Whisper Bard into the party isn't the way though) and the violence it engaged in would be sanctioned, a sort of license to kill (to be ambiguous since James Bonds own psychopathy is often put under the microscope, even to some degree by Flemming). Serial killers, being beset with a wash of clinical antisocial disorders don't recognize that line and draw their own ... at least the one's who think they're in control of their actions ... many also speak of their conduct through a dissociative lens, pulp literarily this is riffed on by the "dark passenger" Dexter contends with. So you have a (defective) personality type in this character who has either grandiose or dissociative senses of self as they kill by their own rules or compulsions ... and that's somehow supposed to be integrated into a party? Yes there are games that "unreal" the world enough where Edgelords and psychotics can function as an integrated unit as they murderhobo with literal moral abandon so that the game is 66.7% killing (leaving 33.3% for long rests ;) ... but that requires the DM to literally entertain the notion, and that's just not the case with this particular game.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I'm going off the DSM, there are going to be different estimates by psychological experts, that field is more of an art than a science, its a range dude. I went with 5% which isn't max and certainly not minimum.
As to normal, if someone wants to play evil, sure they tend to want to be greedy or kill someone who gets in their way, ok most campaigns can deal with it, but eventually the party will kill the guy for being an ******* screwing everything up getting wanted posters for the campaign. Its abnormal to want to play someone who is a serial killer. At the very least, put him in as an lycanthrope or undead to explain the need to feed or put them in as a future NPC and to be a future villain (players do like that, especially if they can uncover the guy is a serial killer), anything to give it a reason, rather than go "I just like to kill innocent people, its fun!". I'm not going to roleplay that crap for a sick puppy in the head. ****, Serial Killers and Pedophile RP's are an immediate boot in my campaign, those are some dark thought's F that crap, I don't want those people near me.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/5-types-people-who-can-ruin-your-life/201804/are-narcissists-and-sociopaths-increasing
Yeah! I totally agree! In the end he understood and he's now waiting for me to finish writing the story so he can build something that could work with the rest of the party
Yeah I guess I can KINDA understand where they're coming from but I swear my friend is such a sweetheart he just can get ahead of himself but we care a lot for eachother! But tbh this thread is being kind of amazing I LOVE to hear advice from everyone! It's super helpful and it made me feel better as a DM, so much so that I did in fact talk with my friend and we sorted things out! He still need to make a character but he understood that he needs to wait since I'm still writing the background of the world!
Thanks again for all the replies!!