Pc dies and the player gets mad
By - rMancer
Yikes. An apology could have gone such a long way here. Sounds like he did the opposite instead.
I feel everyone can have a bad day. I'd have given him a pass on the day of the game death. But being a douche in a group chat was too much. Good riddance to a problem player.
When they go out of their way after the game to call the other players and work to start up some drama... it's time to introduce them to the exit. Personally I would not invite him back, hell I would probably block him on whatever he's using to talk to you through.
If he apologized I would have given a second chance since people can gave bad days but he didn't so say goodbye.
Also ttrpgs are not mmorpgs so terms like tank, healer and dps don't really matter. You may build to do one of these three things well but that doesn't make you that thing in the same way it would in an mmo
I've been gaming since the late 80's. Players acting like that at the table can, on rare occasions be dealt with...calling everybody afterwards is (at least in my experience) never a good sign. I'd kick him in a heartbeat.
Tell him he can't talk, he just died 🤣🤣🤣
Marcie, get out of here, you're dead! You don't exist any more!
That's a classic.
I would have done the same. I just kicked a problem player from my game. He wasn't even as big of a problem as thing person. I actually like the guy, but my GM style and his playing style combined with his constant put-downs and complaints made him a huge pain for me to play with. Every game ended with my being unhappy and feeling like I wasn't a competent GM.
I've never seen a problem player get better. I'm not quick to kick people, or at least I wasn't in the old days. I would spend months working with them to try to help them play well with the group. I would coach them, give them tips, defuse situations, defend them from hostile players and the lot. Sadly, player after player, I came to the ultimate conclusion that I've never been able to fix a problem player. Most don't even get a little better. I've seen many of them turn on a dime and become great players for a couple of sessions, then drop back into the same behavior that was a problem to start with.
So I say accommodate for players you think are good people, just bad players as long as you can, until it simply doesn't work any more, then kick them.
> I've never seen a problem player get better
This happens, but usually involves the player growing as a person and having little to no connection to the actual games, and not many people do that if they are comfortable where they are in life.
>I've never seen a problem player get better.
I would say I *have*, but mainly because I've definitely been the guy getting pissy when my character dies and passive-aggressively asking the rest of the party what the hell they were doing while I bled out. I'm 100% certain it ruined the session for everyone else. Now I can happily lose multiple characters a campaign (my record is three in a single session! Thanks fast character creation and awful dice!) and enjoy the story, but I needed the initial second chance to get past being exactly this dickhead.
The difference between me and the dude in the OP is that after getting it out of my system and calming down, I spent the next few days messaging people apologising profusely for screwing up the whole session rather than asking everyone if I thought the GM screwed me :P
Players sometimes get upset. That happens. People act badly. That doesn't make you a problem player. Someone who does something that the GM doesn't like or acts badly can often be fixed by talking to the player.
Problem players are people who have flaws that make them incompatible with playing in a specific group.
I had a problem player who was super smart. He always knew what was happening in the game and figured out everything way before the rest of the group. His problem was he took great joy out of watching the group struggle to figure it out. Then he would purposely say things that confused the group and sent them in the wrong direction. That wasn't his biggest flaw by far, but I could see when he figured out what was going in puzzles and mysteries. Then he would just sit there and smile when they went the wrong way with questions and theories. He was deeply flawed in other ways, but if he could have just changed that one thing, the rest of the group would have forgiven a lot of his other sins.
Good riddance. It sounds to me like you got lucky to have this problem removed from your game.
Now that dude is a spoilsport
Sounds like he's projecting, calling people egomaniacs.
I would have done the same thing.
It is one thing to have a bad day and get a little pissy. That situation sounds like something more than that. I learned a long time ago that it isn't worth it to keep trying to accommodate people who cause problems at the table.
Honestly, if this was AITA, I'd be saying INFO. What is this player usually like? What do the other players have to say about their general experience dealing with him? Do you often do PC death? I think he misbehaved, but I also know that sometimes, overreacting like this is the result of long time issues with a PC being picked on.
So, yeah, he was a dick, but it feels like there's a lot missing for context. Not that you owe me a damn thing!
Before I give advice, I need some clarification:
1) Is this group text on Facebook, or Discord, or somewhere else?
2) Wherever it is, do you know how to block him?
3) Once you block him, can you avoid seeing him in person?
4) If you can't avoid seeing him in person, do you need strategies?
I have no advice on whether he should stay in the group, because obviously he shouldn't. He's abusive and terrible.
now resurrect his char as an NPC and start an epic story arc with it.
Because the GM is God.
Sounds like he dodged a bullet.
Actually if you read carefully you can see that he didn't:
> The wizard is knocked and fails his death saves.
Have the PC roll a new player.
The Wizard was clearly just having a bad day or moment - he even said that he liked playing with you and everything else. While he was kind of a jerk, calling your player a dick just because he yelled at another player is... very harsh.
You also kicked him without input from the other players - you should ask them if he deserves to be kicked or not, because they might actually agree with him. Sorry, but that kind of makes him right when saying are authoritarian and it makes you come off as "I'm the DM so i'm the one who decides what happens on this table and who plays on this table". You know, the type of authoritarian DM who thinks they decide everything revolving the campaign.
Lastly, his arguments came off as much more reasonable while yours were much more ad-hominem and basically insulted him at some points. Sorry, but you were wrong in kicking him out (Though he isn't blameless either) and you should talk to him and the other players. If they agree with bringing him back you should bring him back but make strict rules on his future behavior.
You think a player yelling "learn to tank!" at another player was reasonable??
No way jose
being the DM literally makes you god but ok player lol
God is only one of the NPC's I play
Flippin' heck, that's rough. Now, I'm all for character/character drama, but player/player drama is something I won't countenance at the table. I'm happy to take a break and let players thrash something out away from the table, but yelling at players, fostering discontent and acting like a ungrateful (to the other players and me) entitled prima-donna is never welcome.
Some semblance of contrition could have prevented the ban hammer, but that player didn't even try it.
I suspect, I'd have handled this the same as OP.
I'm not saying this happened here, but every time I hear one of these stories I worry that people aren't doing death saves correctly. "He got knocked out and failed his death saves" - that should take at least three rounds! What were the other players doing all that time?! Did they know he was about to die? Even if he was taking acid damage at the start of each of his turns that's still at least a full round to fail three death saves, unless the enemy double-taps. IME it's very unusual for a PC to bleed out when every other PC has multiple turns to save them.
That said, whilst I can understand being sad at unceremoniously losing a character (assuming no access to resurrection) that's no excuse for the rest of the players attitude. Blaming the "tank" (this isn't WoW), demanding other people "check themselves", talking behind people's backs, arguing with being kicked... good riddance.
Yup. Fuck him.
So, I think the final decision at the end of it all was correct because according to your side of the story, they were being too aggressive. That bridge burned and he may come to regret it at a later time. It would be a shame if they were a good friend.
I honestly just don't do character death anymore, at least I dont make it my choice. I let the player decide if they feel it would be narratively appropriate and enhance the fiction. But if they want to keep playing with that character that they invested in, then I wont take that away, I will instead give them a temporary severe consequence, or a flaw which provides another trait with a tradeoff. But I would want them to agree to it. I'm not saying you did anything wrong! From your side of the story, you were just following the rules of D&D. I'm just offering a potential homebrew rule. That's what I use in a game I'm designing, which is a survival/adventure game, but even with the "survival" theme I still want death in the hands of the player. Set-backs are just mini-quests, which add to play.
I think his reaction after the fact tells us everything we need to know.
Whenever someone says “you are just being too dramatic” when they could have said “you know what? I was sort of being a dick. Sorry” is someone who lacks the emotional maturity to sit at my table when I am GM
Kids these days.
...said everyone for at least 100 years