I am currently GMing a small RT group with three players. I laid out the guidelines for the game and the characters before play began and allowed the players to discuss what they wanted. As a result, we have moderately experienced characters that began midway through Rank 3. The overall campaign theme was stated to be exploration of the unknown with a mix of social, combat, and investigation thrown in. It was stressed before character creation that flexible characters would be best - overspecialized characters would limit participation in certain activities. Two of the players took this to heart and created a flexible team of a Rogue Trader and Seneschal. They are not the problem...

The third player decided she wanted to play a Navigator - specifically because they are "so weird'. I suggested the Navis Scion in an effort to get her a bit more access to social options, but the player almost knee-jerked away from it. She instead made the least social Navigator possible, with numerous mutations (including Unnatural Presence) and Talents like Unnerving Voice. She also made a big show of describing (in lavish detail) her rainbow-colored hair and painted nails, her unicorn body tattoo, and numerous other eccentricities. She even loves to describe how her eyes constantly twitch - including her Warp Eye, which she doesn't like to cover. I pointed out that this was basically like waving around a loaded gun, and she thought that was "cool" and asked if it helped her with Intimidate...

Once play began, the problems kicked up. She insists on her character attending everything, and she's messed up several social scenes. Even worse, she undermines the other player's attempts in these social scenes by trying to Intimidate everyone. When the players softly express their displeasure, she begins having her character do outrageous stuff in an attempt to draw the spotlight back onto her and her character. In fact, anytime her character is not at the heart of a scene, we have to hear about her character's new tattoo or some such detail that's really only interesting to her. She also has the "bored now; I'll keep opening doors until I find something interesting/dangerous" that's almost gotten everyone killed. Lastly, she's taken to having her character threaten to strand the ship in the middle of nowhere if they don't let her have her way.

So, lots of problems here. If she were not the fiance of one of the other players, I'd likely just bump her from the game. Also, she's a fun person to associate with outside the game, but in-game I find myself tuning her out more and more often. With only three players, that gets pretty obvious quick, and can trip the "bored now" crap-tastrophe, making the matter worse. I'm now three sessions in and already irritated. I intend to talk with her and the rest of the group before the next session, but I'm looking for some input on what angles might be best to take.

HappyDaze said:

Oof. Yeah, that's gonna be an issue. Is she playing because she actually wants to, or as a way of staying close to her fiance? If the former, just explain that the way she plays her character is making the game worse for everyone else. If the latter... run. Just run.

To be harsh, sounds like an attention *****. Got myself such a female player once. I stoppe GM-ing the group. Since you like her otherwise & she is the financee of your other player, this is not an option.

Do you think it would help to talk to her one-on-one and in a very direct way? Not with any threats or harsh, but straightly telling her that she actuallyl ruins a lot of scenes and that this is ruining the game.

Nasty situation and, I would guess by the sound of things, the problem player may not even be that interested in the game as such, she simply wants to be included but finds it all very boring. Next session I would explain, with all 3 players present, that the game seems to have drifted away from the original, stated focus and that you're not really happy GMing it as it currently is.

I'd suggest you propose these options to your group; That all 3 players make 'kooky' characters and then run a high action/horror game (for a few sessions); Or, if all the players agree that the original flavor of the campaign is what they actually want, explain straight out to the problem player that her character just doesn't fit that type of game and she needs to reroll something appropriate.

Best of luck, whatever happens

You have my sympathies. No matter how this ends up, you're in a real tight spot.

It also sounds like it could very easily turn into a lose/lose scenario, so I have no real advice other then what has already been stated.

Assuming you handle things candidly and maturely, stating your concerns and pointing out that the character she has made doesn't fit the campaign focus, you really can't go wrong. Sticking to the facts and avoiding any kind of personal or emotional comments is probably the best way. If you lose your cool or let your emotions off their leash, it could go sideways very fast.

Of course anytime you have that kind of conversation, it could easily backfire no matter what you do, with some pretty serious repercussions for the group.

Best of luck with it...

Gregorius21778 said:

Yeah That happens a bit too often!! Drop, roll and scream! or even better run!!!!!

Well You are lucky mate this is 40K! That is obviously a rogue Navigator (flamboyant about mutation and what not). Most other navigator and even maybe here own house will not want this very bad popularity.

They will 1 warn her/it to stay discreet, if this fails they will simply remove her.

Remember this is the Emperium of Men! It all cool but so not nice. She may think her self cool but many things will shoot without asking anything 1st.

And you have the usual genestealer assault, makes a easy way to show how dangerous the world really is and how easy to kill a navigator in CC is!

Cheers and Good luck!

I've been in this exact same situation before far too many times to count. From my experience, the absolute best way to succeed is to be direct. Putting it off or beating about the bush is only going to make it harder in teh long run. Take your problem player aside and just lay down what your issues are and that she's bringing more problems to the group than awesomeness. Will she appreciate it? No. No she will not.

If she insists on playing the same charaacter n the same way, inform her that you'll stop babysitting her and her actions will have the appropriate consequences. A navigator like this is the exact sort of navigator that has crew desert the ship in record numbers and the ones that stay will be terrified of her... up until they snap and one day in port they either get the local ecclesiarchy onto her or, more likely, form a lynch mob and rush her in her quarters.

When all is said and done, your responsibility isn't to her or the guy she's getting hitched too, but to the game. If she's disrupting the game, she has to be dealt with.

professor_kylan said:

I like most of this - being direct is my typical MO - but if my responsibility is to the game, how likely is the game to survive the fallout if this player has a dramatic blow-up? It's almost certain to have her walk out, and that's going to drag away her fiance too. Then the group drops to a GM and one player, and that's not really the group dynamic I'm looking for in a RT game.

Right now, I'm thinking of giving the new D&D Gamma World a try. Then everyone can be goofy and without screwing up the game. Sadly, this won't satisfy me for long, but I might be able to use it as a counterpoint to what type of play I expect to see in the more serious RT game.

I can't possibly claim to know why you are having problems with your players, but I think there are a few things that are always good to keep in mind as a GM:

1. It is not the GM's game. Its everyones game, if a player wants to play it differently try to make episodes of the game that caters to that player. If you force your game onto a player, it will just be a continuous source of problems. As a GM you must adapt the game world to fit with the players (not meaning that you need to keep them alive!).

2: Maybe a players take on "what a role playing game is about" is simply too different from the rest of the group, and then there should be no shame in letting that player go.

Alox said:

For #1, I know this and I live by it when running (and playing) games. I've made times for her to shine, and she eats them up - although often in ways that are to the detriment to the group (Intimidate on everyone and acting out just for a "wow, that's creepy" factor). The problem is her actions when the others are trying to do their thing (the "attention *****" bit) and her working joyfully to be as antagonsitic in character to everyone - PC and NPC alike - as possible. I'm afraid that making episodes that cater to her idea of fun are going to continue to reduce my fun, and I don't think that's worth it to me.

Sounds like a good plan. Make one "final adventure" for RT to end the ongoing story arc. Afterwards, declare to your players that this was"the final" since do not want to GM RT as what you prepared does not play out.

Sometimes, it is very helpful to just stop playing for a couple of month. Perhaps, you can even go so far and look for an other group

two suggestions i havent seen yet:

1. tell her fiance, he might be in a better position to mention to her that '[OP here] seems to be having a bit of a hard time coping with you being excessively weird, and i think he might ditch the game if you push him much more'. might not be a good idea if they are not a couple that could discuss this sort of thing and survive.

2. be brutal. give her a warning that youre going to amp up the scale of the game, and that in game actions will have in game consequences. every thing she does that makes you want to scream, have a checklist handy to note down who it would piss off:
mechanicus
inquisition
other rogue traders
administratum
navigator houses
navy
etc etc

if any of these get say 3 strikes, have them 'show interest' in the navigator's actions. if things continue, have them escalate their involvement. it sounds like the inquisition would be VERY interested in acquainting her with an interrogation machine.
what i like about the setting is that no matter how carried away the players get, theres always a bigger threat to challenge them and frequently will. are they slaughtering orks on a planet? the orks get bigger and nastier. do they start wiping out chaos worshippers en masse without problems? one of the chaos 4 will send a BIG daemon. the great thing about this is its fairly easy to justify. 'why are the arbites sending ships after us?' because thats the only thing that will stop you pirating, theyre not going to deliberately let you murder enforcers 2 at a time are they?
if she continues to infringe on social meetings, start losing PF. enforce upkeep checks. have her quarters downgraded to cope.
a part of the problem seems to be a lack of clear boundaries on what she can/cannot do. if she is detrimental enough, hopefully the other two will start exerting some control. for extreme control look up 'volitor implant' in bionics, and 'null rod' somewhere in the armoury. if my navigator gets out of control (hes pushing things) the arbites are going to get a bit more involved in his crimes. with anti-psyker enforcers.

most of all, remind her that she IS NOT the only navigator on the ship, and that one good hell pistol shot to her third eye and she is defenceless (almost).

I'm a fan of the "be direct" approach. Anything else is passive aggressive. Talk to her. It is usually possible to have discussions like these without any drama, if you can handle people reasonably well.

Don't phrase things as attacks and accusations, phrase them as requests and explanations. Don't indicate SHE is doing something wrong, explain that you are having a hard time GMing certain things and ask her to help you with it.

RPGs are collaborative storytelling. Work with her to make the story better.

Tonight was set to be the fourth session. We had time to get together before the game and talk. During the talk, I expressed my concerns about the way the game was going. After some talk, things turned to the details of the Navigator. I was not the one to go there first. The other two players - including the Navigator player's fiance - were concerned that the character was inappropriate and harmful to the game. Several ideas were presented, including the possiblity of her making a new character as well as having multiple characters available for her to play (so the Navigator wasn't breaking scenes she was ill-suited to participate in). I didn't even have to push the issues - the others were seeing the problems pretty clearly and were trying to help me out.

She didn't take the hint. She was adamant that she was going to play her character as she saw fit and that no one had any business telling her how her character "should be played". She then stated that it was up to the GM to make the adventures to fit the characters, not for the players to try to fit into the GM's plans. She rejected playing a new character, rejected the idea of a running multiple character stable, and basically rejected any form of compromise. Things didn't get ugly, but I knew when to stop talking to a brick wall. I scratched tonight's session and told them I'd re-examine the campaign over the next week. Oddly enough, the problem player was the most upset by this...

I offered up the D&D Gamma World idea to finish up the night, and we played a quick game. It was fairly fun, but utterly deadly. Game became a TPK in no time, but that was fine with me and the others too. What was amusing is that the Navigator's player was the first to fall because of her stupid (attention whoring) idea on approaching the enemies. She wanted to immediately stop and restart, but the others and I went on without her for another 30 minutes until the game concluded. The look on her face when she couldn't derail the game was telling - she's an attention ***** of the worst type.

So, the RT game will go on, and she will continue to play the annoying Navigator for now. I think that the Gamma World play taught us all to just let the chips fall where they may. Her actions will get her killed soon enough, and I'll just let her sit there for awhile when it happens. When it comes time for her to make a new character, I plan to tighten the options available to her and hopefully I'll get something more fitting, or she'll rebel against that and quit. Either way, I'm not going to use kid gloves on her anymore.

Hi Daze,

nice to hear that your other players are on your side.

HappyDaze said:

My advice: since you cannot get rid of her, forget about RT with this group. Simply tell them that you are unable to bend your previously stated campaign to work around the Navigator and go on with Gamma-World.

Just make her eat tons of Insanity and Corruption pts!

Yeah generally I do the same with my "Kaven Sorbo" player, he always plays a suicidal killing machine, but there is always a stupid trap to try and make him take a FP before every fight (and coinsidaly it takes him out for the fight).

So in the same way, if your Navigator pisses someone one off, he may be targeted 1st! or someone learning about her excentricity may lure her into a trap!

Gregorius21778 said:

I've already made it quite clear that there are a half dozen other Navigators on the ship. She is the senior Navigator, but I've shown them as being disapproving of her ways. She's already on the path to becoming a pariah even among the small circle of NPCs that should be her closest support. Should she go too far and something were to happen to her, an NPC can easily step up into the lead Navigator role.

As for taking it personal, I think I'm OK with that. She has 5 Fate Points (Void Born plus a Origin Path option that gave her an extra point), so she should have plenty of opportunities to cheat death. Hopefully she'll learn quickly enough, but if not I really don't care. Her reaction to her character's death in Gamma World already showed me her petulant and totally self-centered response, so I'll just plan for it.

I have pulled in two more players. One is very familiar with WH40K and is a big believer in teamwork (he actually seems to care what roles the group might need filled). The other is less known to me, but has a lot of RPG experience and a positive attitude and also seems interested in shoring up weak spots in the team. These players should help with the problem, one way or another.

HappyDaze said:

Sounds like you've already picked up on most of the advice I was going to give. First and foremost, this player wants to be the center of attention. Failing that she'll try to ruin the game for everyone else. The only way to deal with that is to get rid of her and, if need be, find more players elsewhere.

Normally I'm a big supporter of the idea that everyone should have equal input (GM and players) as to where the game goes and what the story that's told turns out to be, but the bottom line is she can't be the center of attention all the time. Even if you give her the 15 minutes she wants, the other players deserve a turn in the spotlight too, and it doesn't sound like she's willing to give them their turn. (The bit about her insisting the GW game be stopped as soon as she died is the most telling aspect of this whole sordid tale.)

You've tried to compromise with her - in a number of very creative and ingenious ways, I might add. I never would have though of giving her a "stable" of characters to choose from, but it's a great idea for this kind of player. Too bad she didn't see the opportunity to be great at everything via different bodies. She makes a valid point about the GM being responsible for making the game fun for everyone, but she seems to think that "everyone" means her alone, since the game is expected to come to a screeching halt if she isn't front and center. This is definitely her problem, not yours.

If you don't want to flat out boot her, then taking the kid gloves off is about all you can do (and all you should do.) The only problem I foresee is that constantly having your lead navigator arrested or killed ("seriously wounded") might also bog down things for the other players who have to associate themselves with her.

You could also trying messing with her by having an NPC respond in an unexpected means to her flagrant display of mutation and intimidation. Introduce a character who gets turned on by her freakish aspects. Maybe someone who has a few mutations and/or dolphin tattoos of his own. Let them get along grandly. Perhaps too grandly. Then said NPC turns out to be a genestealer cultist or chaos insurrectionist, tempting her to the dark side of things. She'll probably kill him when she figures it out, but see how far you can take the character before she realizes this positive attention isn't necessarily a good thing.

She'll either love the attention and hopefully calm down a bit for the rest of the session, or she'll get bugged out by the fact that someone else in the universe likes her appearance (she seems to take great pride in being a freak.) At this point it sounds like you're just tweaking her strings until she ragequits anyway. If nothing else, this NPC could keep her occupied in one corner of the game while the other players do important things elsewhere.

I would give her enough rope to hang herself with. Nothing very difficult, but the cost is going to be fate, and insanity/corruption.

Have a low-level agent of either her navigator house or a throne agent request her presence for an interview. Make sure the agent is clearly identified and that they are obviously a weakling, and the interview location is not a particular secured location or even important.

That's usually enough room for them to break every social rule and get an otherwise routine, but important, piece of detail to escalate quickly into an extremely dangerous situation with the wrong people.

Or, just because most Inquistors are quiet and shrewd it doesn't mean they all are: have a loud, obnoxious one who intentionally provokes your navigator with full intent to bully them and as an Inqusitor there is nothing they can do about it. Maybe a good Winston Churchhill quote would be appropriate: "Navigator, my dear, you are mutant, and what's more, you are disgusting mutant. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgusting mutant."

Or, conversely tempt them with something, again, using a low-level dupe who explicitly warns them not to do something - and smack them with a large amount of corruption or insanity points. In the dark future there are some things you are not meant to know, and at the same time, and don't grant any benefit from having learned from it.

She attracks a bunch of fervent followers, they love her, protect her and generally enjoy all her excentricity.

Then they show here Slaneshee and how she allow them to plant a chaos cult on the ship. That should be enough for the other players to end her or give them reason to bring someone in to do it, like the house Scion or something.

I just have to say, that dealing with a troublesome player in-game, is seldom if ever, the way to go.

Anything else except an upfront discussion, out of game, is not going to end well. She will percive it as you bullying her, and in the end, she will either quit due to rage/hurt feelings, or fight back, trying at everypoint to mess things up.

I know dealing with this ingame, and I am a firm beliver that if you walk around with the Warp Eye uncovered, you will attract a lot of unwanted attention. However, trying to "change her mind" in-game i going to backfire, and even if it doesn't, its like applying a band-aid to hurt wound, and you need surgery.

Deal with it out of game. If that is not an option, and she won't see that her actions is ruining if for the other players (make sure she realises it's players, not characters), then she simply doesn't belong in the group.

Just my 2... 4-5... Dont want to count, just my few cents.

I don't know, personally I don't have to educate people into becoming better persons, mind you I am full of flaws too but try to put those that make me a bad player/dm in check...

It's someone else GF, let him deal with it. If he is your friend he will understand your point.

Also a player that is always put in a cotton wools never learn. She makes mistakes, then the world must react to her.

I have had a few players making darn stupid moves that end up killing them :

"I insult the king's Templar!",

my answer " By the kings law, to insult a Templar is the insult the King himself, purge your sin by fire", make a save vs spell for half dmg vs pilar of fire.

"But, but... I am a player!",

So since that perticular Templar was the high totemic, it deals 20D6 dmg..

"But, but... I am dead",

"Next time learn to shut your pie hole foo!", says the dwarf.

crisaron said:

Note: this is a hard topic to talk about without coming across rude, so hopefully I succeed

This has nothing to do with "educating people into becoming better persons", it is a basic social skill, i.e. the ability to talk to people to work out problems instead of using passive/aggressive attacks to try to force them to change. And you don't seem to buy it either. You are still trying to change them, but instead of doing it face to face you are using your GM powers to do it.

The thing is, I'm would guess you tend to be passive/aggressive about other things in your life too, and justify it in a similar way.

Talking to people face to face is almost ALWAYS the best solution to interpersonal problems, and typically leads to everyone having a better time. Passive/aggrissive solutions almost always just lead to bickering, hard feelings, and a general bad atmosphere.

And coaching your players IS the job of a GM when faced with new players. I became a good player because I had a GM that was willing to coach me a bit, and I have introduced numerous new players to the hobby and helped them become good players. Most people WANT to be good players, WANT people to like them, and WANT to have a good time, they just don't know how.

Likely this player has little idea that she is really doing something wrong. She probably thinks that if she does lots of cool things and dresses in cool ways, people will think she is cool, and she probably mistakes her own fun for the groups fun.

Now sometimes the face to face conversation will break down, it is true, but this is usually due to it being approached as an accusation and attack. If it is approached as...coaching, and a request to make the game better, and help everyone have more fun, most people don't get defensive. Those that do, well, at that point the GM has to perform his/her hardest responsability and ask them to leave the game. Never a fun thing to do, but that is part of the responsability of being a GM.

This isn't even just about games. Learn to talk to people about the problems you have with them in life, and things will just go a lot easier. This is the #1 cause for drama in gaming groups...and high school. And really, do you want your gaming group to be like high school?

I am a firm believer in handling player issues outside of the game. I have tried this. I really have, and so have two of the other players. My next step outside of the game is to remove the offending player, but I'm not quite to that point yet. I will continue to run the game, and the "safety" will be off should the characters (any of them) make poor decisions. Such character issues will be handled in-game as fits the situation. However, if the problem player persists in her derailment/attention-whoring behavior then my corrective action will be an out of game one.

As for the high school comparison, it never ceases to amaze me how every career job I've worked has social tensions that very much resemble high school. When I was younger and worked retail and fast food, such things were to be expected when the workers were typically 16-25. Now having worked in corrections, court/probation, mental health, and hospitals (including a military/fed gvmt hospital), I can safely say that there's still an alarming dose of high school left in all of us.