Author Topic: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?  (Read 42910 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PhoenixInferno

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2008, 02:27:17 AM »
Well that seems reasonable, though I can't say I've ever had a D&D discussion (or, come to think of it, any other discussion), end in a screaming match. Still, I had this horrible mental image of the show Cops breaking up a D&D game, chasing a pasty-skinned, overweight guy with an unkempt beard and no shirt down the street while he screams "Expeditious Retreat!"
LOL, that's awesome!

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #21 on: August 29, 2008, 02:37:10 AM »
Part of the idea of tackle Dungeons and Dragons appeals to me, but at the same time, I think it would end up with a great deal more D&D players getting arrested and winding up on the news.
I wonder how many LARPers get arrested...

Anyway, I personally think that while it is certainly a response that comes up too quickly and too often, there are times for both DMs and players when they should consider leaving or asking a player to leave. For players, this is usually when it is clear that they will not enjoy the game, either because it simply isn't the style they like or because the DM is being "unreasonable" (that is, literally not listening to reason and logic). In these cases, where I can understand a player leaving, there is no compromise being allowed by the DM or the other players and it would become a tense and detrimental situation for the player to continue with this group as opposed to finding another group (or another game, if playing online). In the case of DMs, it is much the same. If the player has been approached about a problem (acting out grudges in-game, unacceptable social behavior, disrupting the campaign (various ways), ignoring the rules or restrictions (such as insisting on playing a class the DM has not allowed in the game; or the more extreme "cheating"), etc.) and has either completely refused to change or has only caused different problems in lieu of being denied his or her other disruptive behavior, or has said they would cease only to continue, then I can see it being justifiable to remove the player from the group.

To make an analogy, one of your "friends" comes up to you and punches you. You tell him to stop. He does it again. At this point, he's being a total dick. You tell him that he really needs to stop punching you or else you're going to have to call the cops to have him removed from the premises (lets say he's over at your house when he does that - you're the DM in this analogy anyway). He tells you, flat-out, "no," and punches you again. Are you justified in calling the cops to have him removed and/or to possibly file a restraining order and refuse to see him? I would say, "yes." Now, obviously, this might be a more serious case than merely being a dick about a game, but either way there is unwanted behavior and an unwillingness to cease said behavior. And in both cases it is detrimental to the DM (and other players involved - if they were present in this analogy, I guess he would be randomly hitting all of them throughout the evening or something as they hang out and watch football). There is no reason to put up with this (the fact that it might be psychotic behavior aside). It should not be required to pause and ask, "why are you punching me (us) in the face?," even as he continues to do it, allowing him to keep beating on you until you find out what the matter is (keeping him in the group, refusing to kick the player, even as he continues his behavior). There is a certain point when "kicking" a player from a group is acceptable.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #22 on: August 29, 2008, 03:42:51 PM »
Quote
I still stand by my initial assessment of first trying to handle the problem in a non-passive-aggressive way, and then booting if that doesn't help.

In all the games I've played in, I never had to boot a player.  I did have to have a one-on-one discussion with a guy who kept cheating, but it seemed to generally solve the problem.
So you have never actually kicked anyone out.  What kind of proof would satisfy you if that doesn't?
I guess I'm confused what you mean by that last sentence.

As for kicking someone out: I haven't kicked anyone out of a game, but when we did resume playing after one summer, I didn't invite the problem player back.  The reasons for that go beyond the game, as we pretty much dropped all contact with him.  So, short answer:  I've never kicked anybody out, but I've had players I've refused to game with after the fact.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2008, 02:39:36 AM »
Quote
I still stand by my initial assessment of first trying to handle the problem in a non-passive-aggressive way, and then booting if that doesn't help.

In all the games I've played in, I never had to boot a player.  I did have to have a one-on-one discussion with a guy who kept cheating, but it seemed to generally solve the problem.
So you have never actually kicked anyone out.  What kind of proof would satisfy you if that doesn't?
I guess I'm confused what you mean by that last sentence.

As for kicking someone out: I haven't kicked anyone out of a game, but when we did resume playing after one summer, I didn't invite the problem player back.  The reasons for that go beyond the game, as we pretty much dropped all contact with him.  So, short answer:  I've never kicked anybody out, but I've had players I've refused to game with after the fact.
So you kicked him out for out of game reasons? 

What I mean by that sentence is you have never kicked someone out, so you have no real example of someone who needed kicking out. 
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009

SillyRobot

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2008, 08:58:34 AM »
The few times a person as been kicked from a group I'm in has almost always been for out-of-game reasons.  There was only one time I can recall where someone was kicked for in-game reasons.  It was my game.

The group had been gaming together for a few years by now and I'd noticed certain players were becoming increasingly reckless in play regardless of system or genre.

The next time a campaign was ending I announced that I had a suspense/horror mini campaign ready to go.  I picked a system without resurrection and announced that as part of the house rules that no replacement characters would be allowed.  If a character died, the player was out for the duration.

The scenario lasted about 8 sessions and session 2 had the only death.

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #25 on: August 30, 2008, 06:54:10 PM »
The few times a person as been kicked from a group I'm in has almost always been for out-of-game reasons.  There was only one time I can recall where someone was kicked for in-game reasons.  It was my game.

The group had been gaming together for a few years by now and I'd noticed certain players were becoming increasingly reckless in play regardless of system or genre.

The next time a campaign was ending I announced that I had a suspense/horror mini campaign ready to go.  I picked a system without resurrection and announced that as part of the house rules that no replacement characters would be allowed.  If a character died, the player was out for the duration.

The scenario lasted about 8 sessions and session 2 had the only death.

Now do you know that that is a terrible failure as a GM?  Or do you think you did well?
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009

SillyRobot

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #26 on: August 30, 2008, 07:40:08 PM »
Actually, I think I did well.

The players were informed in advance as to the house rule and its reasoning. 

The enforcement of the one character per player reinforced the genre conventions required for the adventure set.  Certainly, character caution increased and kamikaze style play was mostly reduced.

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #27 on: August 30, 2008, 08:02:22 PM »
Actually, I think I did well.

The players were informed in advance as to the house rule and its reasoning. 

The enforcement of the one character per player reinforced the genre conventions required for the adventure set.  Certainly, character caution increased and kamikaze style play was mostly reduced.
I'm going to kick you in the nuts.  Don't worry, it's ok because I told you I'm going to do it...

In "good" gaming character death is either difficult or meaningless.  What is the point of forbidding people to play?  Play is the point.

Besides cautious PCs are lame, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #28 on: August 30, 2008, 08:22:28 PM »
Well that seems reasonable, though I can't say I've ever had a D&D discussion (or, come to think of it, any other discussion), end in a screaming match. Still, I had this horrible mental image of the show Cops breaking up a D&D game, chasing a pasty-skinned, overweight guy with an unkempt beard and no shirt down the street while he screams "Expeditious Retreat!"
LOL, that's awesome!

+1.

Back on topic, the bit about one life just shifted it to the other extreme. Now instead of reckless characters, you get 'outrun the dwarf, screw the zombies' characters. So much for team play eh?
Smiting Imbeciles since 1985.

If you hear this music, run.

And don't forget:


There is no greater contribution than Hi Welcome.

Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.

IP proofing and avoiding being CAPed OR - how to make characters relevant in the long term.

Friends don't let friends be Short Bus Hobos.

[spoiler]
Sunic may be more abrasive than sandpaper coated in chainsaws (not that its a bad thing, he really does know what he's talking about), but just posting in this thread without warning and telling him he's an asshole which, if you knew his past experiences on WotC and Paizo is flat-out uncalled for. Never mind the insults (which are clearly 4Chan-level childish). You say people like Sunic are the bane of the internet? Try looking at your own post and telling me you are better than him.

Here's a fun fact: You aren't. By a few leagues.
[/spoiler]

SillyRobot

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2008, 08:37:20 PM »



I'm going to kick you in the nuts.  Don't worry, it's ok because I told you I'm going to do it...

Sure,  If I knew I signed up specifically for that, go for it.

Quote
In "good" gaming character death is either difficult or meaningless.  What is the point of forbidding people to play?  Play is the point.

The point of the exercise was to roleplay a suspense/investigation scenario.  Death was difficult if the scenario was approached in almost any sane manner (and many insane ones for that matter) and character replacement would have been difficult and/or unjustifiable given the environment.  However, if approached particularly recklessly, death could still be a consequence.

Quote
Besides cautious PCs are lame

Well, I glad that's been cleared up!  I now know the one and true correct way to play!

Quote
, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."
 

More like, hey guys, replacing 2-3 player characters every week is getting tiresome and hard on campaign continuity.  Since this campaign is wrapping up anyway let's try something different for a few weeks.  I've got this idea for a modern mystery, but character replacement won't be possible.  I figure it'll take about 6-10 sessions, are you in?


SillyRobot

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #30 on: August 30, 2008, 08:40:27 PM »
Well that seems reasonable, though I can't say I've ever had a D&D discussion (or, come to think of it, any other discussion), end in a screaming match. Still, I had this horrible mental image of the show Cops breaking up a D&D game, chasing a pasty-skinned, overweight guy with an unkempt beard and no shirt down the street while he screams "Expeditious Retreat!"
LOL, that's awesome!

+1.

Back on topic, the bit about one life just shifted it to the other extreme. Now instead of reckless characters, you get 'outrun the dwarf, screw the zombies' characters. So much for team play eh?

Depends on the scenario.  Typical adventuring can certainly go that route.  Survival campaigns and interdependent parties will lean on each other even harder.

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #31 on: August 30, 2008, 09:34:28 PM »



I'm going to kick you in the nuts.  Don't worry, it's ok because I told you I'm going to do it...

Sure,  If I knew I signed up specifically for that, go for it.

Quote
In "good" gaming character death is either difficult or meaningless.  What is the point of forbidding people to play?  Play is the point.

The point of the exercise was to roleplay a suspense/investigation scenario.  Death was difficult if the scenario was approached in almost any sane manner (and many insane ones for that matter) and character replacement would have been difficult and/or unjustifiable given the environment.  However, if approached particularly recklessly, death could still be a consequence.

Quote
Besides cautious PCs are lame

Well, I glad that's been cleared up!  I now know the one and true correct way to play!

Quote
, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."
 

More like, hey guys, replacing 2-3 player characters every week is getting tiresome and hard on campaign continuity.  Since this campaign is wrapping up anyway let's try something different for a few weeks.  I've got this idea for a modern mystery, but character replacement won't be possible.  I figure it'll take about 6-10 sessions, are you in?



You've heard the expression "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"?  That's what you are doing.

Your players did not sign up to be kicked in the nuts, you forced them into it.

Trying to fix spastic PCs by killing them is like digging your lawn up every time the grass gets long.   Sure it takes care of the "problem" but why not "solve" the problem and just mow?

Identify the problem, Solve the problem and Don't let it happen in the future.  If you would like to discuss what you should have done, start a new thread (link to it from here).

----

Back on topic, are there any other people who would like to offer any cases of reasons to kick people out or are we all happy with zero?
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #32 on: August 30, 2008, 09:56:18 PM »
Besides cautious PCs are lame, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."

Yeah, forces forbid that you experiment with a different style of play for once! Josh, while you obviously few it as "lame," survival games can be pretty exciting, too, because trying to prepare for the unknown (and never knowing when fifty zombies could pop out of nowhere) can itself be thrilling.

Seriously, calling a style of play "lame" is entirely subjective.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #33 on: August 30, 2008, 10:22:00 PM »
Besides cautious PCs are lame, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."

Yeah, forces forbid that you experiment with a different style of play for once! Josh, while you obviously few it as "lame," survival games can be pretty exciting, too, because trying to prepare for the unknown (and never knowing when fifty zombies could pop out of nowhere) can itself be thrilling.

Seriously, calling a style of play "lame" is entirely subjective.
In the sense of an RPG caution is lame.  caution slows down the game, brings nothing to the table and can choke off fun opportunities.  In exchange it offers, well nothing because it's a game and fortune favors the bold.

Caution in players is bad, caution in characters is a trait (that will be met with derision by the other characters).
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009

Omen of Peace

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Wise Madman
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #34 on: August 30, 2008, 10:30:38 PM »
Or the characters are cautious because they know they live in a deadly (game)world. It doesn't have to be boring. I don't see anything wrong with this playstyle either.

Quote from: SillyRobot
Well, I glad that's been cleared up!  I now know the one and true correct way to play!
The Malazan Book of the Fallen, Steven Erikson

SillyRobot

  • Ring-Tailed Lemur
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #35 on: August 30, 2008, 10:32:55 PM »



I'm going to kick you in the nuts.  Don't worry, it's ok because I told you I'm going to do it...

Sure,  If I knew I signed up specifically for that, go for it.

Quote
In "good" gaming character death is either difficult or meaningless.  What is the point of forbidding people to play?  Play is the point.

The point of the exercise was to roleplay a suspense/investigation scenario.  Death was difficult if the scenario was approached in almost any sane manner (and many insane ones for that matter) and character replacement would have been difficult and/or unjustifiable given the environment.  However, if approached particularly recklessly, death could still be a consequence.

Quote
Besides cautious PCs are lame

Well, I glad that's been cleared up!  I now know the one and true correct way to play!

Quote
, what was the point of the exercise.  "Hey guys, I noticed that you are hiving too much fun and being a little too awesome.  So I have some ideas to reign that in."
 

More like, hey guys, replacing 2-3 player characters every week is getting tiresome and hard on campaign continuity.  Since this campaign is wrapping up anyway let's try something different for a few weeks.  I've got this idea for a modern mystery, but character replacement won't be possible.  I figure it'll take about 6-10 sessions, are you in?



You've heard the expression "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"?  That's what you are doing.

Your players did not sign up to be kicked in the nuts, you forced them into it.

Trying to fix spastic PCs by killing them is like digging your lawn up every time the grass gets long.   Sure it takes care of the "problem" but why not "solve" the problem and just mow?

Identify the problem, Solve the problem and Don't let it happen in the future.  If you would like to discuss what you should have done, start a new thread (link to it from here).

----

Back on topic, are there any other people who would like to offer any cases of reasons to kick people out or are we all happy with zero?

I wasn't trying to "fix" the PCs or the players -- I was presenting a different type of scenario as as alternative to my player base -- one that would offer relief to me.

I'm sorry a style of play disturbs you so much.  Hopefully you won't be confronted by it in the future.

I did what I did for reasons I had.  Do I have any regrets? No.  Why should I care to discuss what I "should" have done?

Nox_Noctis

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1236
  • A Simple Exchange
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #36 on: August 30, 2008, 11:07:00 PM »
In the sense of an RPG caution is lame.  caution slows down the game, brings nothing to the table and can choke off fun opportunities.  In exchange it offers, well nothing because it's a game and fortune favors the bold.

Caution in players is bad, caution in characters is a trait (that will be met with derision by the other characters).

I'm not going to try to argue anymore since the concept of "opinion" is lost.
[spoiler]
[/spoiler]

fil kearney

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
    • KILLFEAR.COM
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #37 on: August 30, 2008, 11:41:40 PM »
I don't think this has been brought up yet, so let me know where I missed it if I did...It sounds like everyone is talking from a perspective of eeryone at the table are old friend or something....

I PbP, and all of my players are complete srangers to me.  So each is effectively a blind date.  Some I/we will click with.... some not. 

If you went on a blind date with someone you
1. do not find attractive
2. dislike their mannerisms and personality
3. do not agree with on many issues

would you try another 3 or 4 dates, just to see if it'll work out? 

I really don't think in this case, it is wrong to just say, "hey it ain't working out.". 
If it is old friends you are gaming with and you just up and out someone from your game, yer not much of a friend, eh?  but when you are meeting new folks, I think it is outrageous to assume you WILL accept them.  that is just bullshit. 

I have rejected a number of people from my games.  and I have walked away from other DM's I don't like.  If you don't match, don't waste your time.  No one is required to spend time with someone els.  I"m not required to "make it work" if I don't want to.... find another game, find another player.

I think this is an important aspect to discuss, simply because there are PbP games hosted here. 
how do the "don't kick people out" team feel about this scenario?

Omen of Peace

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Wise Madman
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #38 on: August 30, 2008, 11:51:13 PM »
Good point. I wanted to mention it but forgot (I PbP a lot too). In PbP the DM is under no obligation to bend over backwards for players (especially new players) if it costs him too much time/fun (and if he made his limits clear - again the social contract is the important thing).

It still doesn't mean posters should recommend to kick players out in this forum, since people who come here with a request do want to invest some time in making things work, but it's perfectly valid for this thread.
The Malazan Book of the Fallen, Steven Erikson

Josh

  • Brilliant Gameologist
  • Grape ape
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
    • Email
Re: Kicking a Player Out-- Never or Last Resort?
« Reply #39 on: August 31, 2008, 12:04:49 AM »
Or the characters are cautious because they know they live in a deadly (game)world. It doesn't have to be boring. I don't see anything wrong with this playstyle either.

Quote from: SillyRobot
Well, I glad that's been cleared up!  I now know the one and true correct way to play!

You do understand the difference between characters and players right?

To everyone cautious players are bad.  Cautious characters are fine.
Ennies Nominees - Best Podcast 2009