How to Deal with Problem Players in D&D, Part 2 

Free D&D Adventures and DM Resources ▶▶ bit.ly/TheDMLairSite Get a monthly PDF full of DM resources such as magic items, new monsters, adventure ideas, premade encounters, and even entire D&D 5e adventures ▶▶ bit.ly/theDMLairPatreon More Free & Inexpensive D&D Adventures and Resources ▶▶ bit.ly/DTRPGLukeHart Twitch Live Streams ▶▶ bit.ly/TheDMLairTwitch Pre-Order my Kickstarter Into the Fey ▶▶ www.kickstarter.com/projects/thedmlair/into-the-fey

Holy s***, I need to award inspiration to one of my players. He's actually had moments where he says, "I the player knows Erica (his PC) is not immortal, and is probably going to die, but Erica thinks she's immortal, so she jumps off the bridge". This is proper "that's what my character would do".

I’m the jokester... The main problem is when you’re attempting a witty one-liner and then everyone stops to talk about it.. that’s when I’m just looking at the DM like “I am so sorry...”

I actually had a perma newb and we tried a few things with some success. She has since graduated to newbish. She loves the game, but even after a year and a half she has difficulty remembering somethings. We have to remember our players are as unique as the characters they make and we may need to think out of the box to help them feel included and be able to participate. 1, We got her colored dice. Each die was a different color and we highlighted her character sheet with the color die she should roll. This worked amazingly! 2, We made economy flash cards. She loved the idea of a rogue, but couldn't remember all the actions to take during a session. This was more of a 50/50. Simple combats it worked well, ones with added dynamics not so much. 3, For the role playing aspect, she wanted to participate but was afraid people would judge her (we had some problem players who are no longer problems). I ran a duet with her and slowly added players once she was comfortable talking and RPing with just me. This way she had a smaller audience and was not pushed for time by other players. So far this has worked well but may not work with everyone. She's improved so much and I'm really proud of her.😁

DM Lair: "How to deal with problem players. " Me after seeing the thumbnail: say no more.

When it comes to metagaming, I like to ask my DM if my character would know anything about that creature, and they usually offer me a free action Arcana/Nature check to find out.

I am a Fighter and I am proficient with the greatsword and the maul. Due to that proficiency I am well aware of how these weapons injur and kill. The blade is designed and intended to slice soft flesh. It certainly is a bonus for the blade to also be strong enough and sharp enough to cleave bone as well, but flesh is the blade's bread and butter. I also know that the maul is designed for the intent of crushing the bones beneath the flesh. It will do severe damage to the flesh as well, but that is really more incidental. So I see a Skeleton. No flesh for my blade to slice. LOTS of bones for my maul to crush. I switch from my SLICING weapon to my CRUSHING weapon because it is plainly obvious, in story, to my character, that the maul will be more effective against this enemy. That's not metagaming. That's accurately playing a well trained warrior who knows his weapons well, and understands how to size up a situation and choose the right tool for the job. I got a 15 for Initiative....can we get on with this now, or what?

Luke: Don't make encounters unbeatable, they'll be terrified of everything Every Curse of Strahd DM: Why not? They need to be scared!

With the Puppet Master, it's easier to spot them when you switch to board games. Know someone who actually moves our pawn for us because "it's the best route for you."

Excuse for the skeleton example: I pull out my maul instead of my greatsword because they are clearly made of bones, and bones break more easily under blunt force.

I admit to being a serial character creator. But I always seriously play whatever character I currently have in a game. My play group call it "flavor of the week."player.

The Shy One alternate solution: Break everything down into turns; Go around the table left to right like in traditional board games asking everyone what do you do this turn of exploring, dungeoneering, social stuff, etc.

"Why did you put up the greatsword and use the maul against the skeletons?" "Because skeletons are only bones and it's logical that a bludgeoning weapon would be far more effective than a slashing weapon." Metagaming is... odd. For starters the longer you play DnD the more you will, inevitably, metagame. You can only face a troll so many times before you know everything about it. You can only face mimics so many times, you can only face giants so many times... IMHO metagaming is only really a problem in the game when it's tied with cheating. When you bring a monster into the game and the player 'looks up' the stat block and then uses that knowledge.

One thing that I believe doesn't get mentioned enough is screening players _before_ they are players. I know some people feel it's a little too gate-keepy, but it's a fantastic tool for group stability. The group I've been playing with at least once a week for the past 3 years is put together almost entirely of people who were complete strangers previously, but it's been fantastic. The two of us that first got the ball rolling were very careful to screen out problem players/personalities before we even started, and made sure we were picking up players with similar interests and expectations for the game. I feel like people in this hobby try really hard to be inclusive. We love this game, and so we want to give others the opportunity to love it too, and that's generally a good thing. That said, I believe it's sometimes to our own detriment, and I would encourage people trying to put a group together to try being just a little more exclusive than you'd normally feel comfortable with. You might be surprised at how much it improves your game.

I once asked my DM if there was a chance my pc could understand something because I was unsure 🤷‍♂️

A simple explanation of why i would replace a sword for a mace, i am a warrior it is common sense that a sword is for cutting flesh making your foes bleed to death, unfortunately skeletons don't have flesh or vital organs so obviously you should use the object designed for crushing bones. The reason a mace kills is because in crushes bones and skulls.

one of the main reasons I watch DM lair videos is to keep up on the whole lore surroundimg the skits

I am a quiet player. It’s not that I’m shy, but it’s more of me trying to be respectful to the other players

A thing to remember is a fighter is trained to fight, and would know how to deal with some common monsters. If a monster is common near where a character is from they may know some tricks for fighting them. The party is adventurers at least starting ones and should have some knowledge. A rule I use is if the player isn't paying attention their character isn't paying attention, if something happens the other players can fill them in or not, or they miss their turn in combat. Normally explaining that rule ahead of time keeps people paying attention. I explain that if someone decides to try to build an over powered character than I have to increase the difficulty of the encounters so it will challenge them which could prove detrimental to the rest of the party. I find being open with your players is a good way to prevent some of these issues.

I have a shy player at the center of the story, It makes for an interesting dynamic, As they don't necessarily share everything they know, But the party thinks they're just as confused as the rest, Which in some instances is true.

I used to be a puppet master. Then I watched videos like this one and now I shut up

**When all else fails** Time to replace the player. There are more players looking for a game than there are DMs looking for players.

Another great video... Definitely have several of those descriptions in just one of my players. Unfortunately, it's my daughter who wants to be involved, but gets bored with everything but combat (which can also be boring to her). She tends to join the group when she wants to, which is also hard on the rest of the party (her two sisters and her dad).

I recently had a DM critic who was also a Puppet master, a freak out and a bully. Because I knew him for years prior to the campaign, I felt guilty every time I considered asking him to leave (since every time I tried taking to him about his behaviour, he would become belligerent and a bully that gaslit me. I finally kicked him when my entire family were like "yoh. Kick this guy. He's crushing your mental health". Game has been so fun after he was removed from the game

I run online for friends. In the first combat I didn't hide AC and HP and they explicitly asked me to hide them somehow because they can't help but look. The second session the group backed out of a fight with 4 snakes due to this. They have my respect.

Here's one: I had a person in my group that always rolled a the same character. Every campaign was a slightly varied version of the main character from the "novel" they were writing. This person always sat back and let rest of the party do the heavy lifting. If it was combat they'd fire an occasional arrow from a safe distance. If it was a sketchy corridor they'd let the others go first (btw this person ALWAYS played a rogue). It was terribly frustrating as a dm and a player.

What if the Jokester is the DM (it's me I'm the Jokester DM, it's a problem)

Age old advice. Talk to your players.

Thank you for this series, its helping me working through my feelings. I just shared it with the Paladin in my group because he and I are having a bit of a tough week . We are in a party on Roll20 where the evil/sadist/chaotic characters outnumber characters that are good/lawful (aka he and I). Our DM is looking at splitting our group in half according to our alignments and or coming up with another solution. If he doesn't do something, he and I feel that our group members will end up killing each other and our allies and pets because of our backgrounds, goals, and inability to agree/compromise. The Paladin and I aren't cool with this. Its really, really frustrating when you feel like you can't role player your character without it leading to a profound amount of death and destruction. If you have any advice for players and DMs going through this situation, let me know. In our case, we didn't have a session zero, the DM let whomever wanted to join the party join, so that may be part of the issue. I believe in inclusion, but I also believe in being wise, and I'm not sure where the line is.

For quiet players, I like to provide them character specific backstory RP events at the table. Recently, our cleric and wizard turned themselves in to clear their names and were arrested. During this time, the cleric's father in the cell across from them, spoke to her directly. The player had fun and the strong voices were actually doing something else.

The most detailed approach to the topic i found so far. Well done :) I am a player and it expanded my horizons knowing what peopel feel when playing with me. As a shy and sometimes easily distracted player I have hard time catch up with others. Once I was playing online with a group that was super expressive and were overwhelming me. After a few sessions i got an idle kick. None of them wanted to interact in character with me and they would rather get rig of a player to make scheduling easier.

As a player (first time RPG player in general), I'm extremely grateful to my GM and fellow party members for their great patience in tolerating my EXTENDED, EXTENDED noob phase. It's not that I didn't care, I just genuinely had trouble understanding the conceptual underpinnings and mechanics. Like, I have never been a video game player, so the transition in framing between a fictional character's narrative and personality and story, and the mechanics of taking action and that being tracked numerically, was extremely unnatural to my thinking. I would *dread* combat because I felt so stupid and lost even when I tried hard. It was a relief when we had a session with no combat. I felt like I was always forgetting something important, even when I reread the materials over and over again. And I would take forever to make any decisions. I've just tried to make up for it by being very into the RP and trying to be fun and creative with that. It took almost two years before everything really started to sink in and feel somewhat natural. And even now there are basic things that I mess up.

describes one of our players sits forward in anticipation "Honestly, I have no idea how to deal with this one." Cue the Norman sigh

Most of the games i run right now are with a group full of "The Permanent Newb"s and honestly, it can be incredibly fun. The solution is to lean into the reason they're there, the social. Either try to give them situations that facilitate interparty-roleplay or do your best to introduce them to colorful characters. I think it's also a fuuuuckton easier to have everyone enjoy themselves if ALL your players are permanent newbies as opposed to just having one in your regular group. Most recently i played through "Santac'Laus is Coming to Town" by Dan Williams and it was wonderful! It's very silly so the newbies don't have to take things too seriously and don't feel like they have to take active part in every single scene. It's got just enough characterization so as to get the players interested in a character but is still vague enough that you can kinda build the character on the fly. Lillian has like 2 sentences about her in the whole thing but my party immediately adopted her and she served as a kind of guide to the town. I'd recommend it if you have time before christmas, there's a giant mech they can pilot it's dope.

I once had a player who would not stop cracking jokes EVERY FIVE MINUTES!!! It drove me insane and even my other players complained to me about it saying how it was getting out of hand. I had to agree with them and told them that I would deal with it. I pulled that player aside and explained to him, kindly but firmly, that the joking was starting to interfere with the game, other players were complaining to me about it, and, as the DM, I had to do something about it. I explained that joking while shopping or while getting a few drinks in a tavern was one thing, but joking while getting important information from an NPC, during combat, or other situations that required the PCs to be more serious was NOT ok. I’m glad to say the player has stopped joking every 5 minutes and to prevent the problem from occurring again, I have now put strict limits on the amount of joking at my game table. If they want to joke around excessively, they can do so at another DM’s game table but not at mine.

I solved the problem with players who want to change characters ali the time years ago. Simple, when your character dies, you can make a new character. This has resulted in some amazing moments of heroism in the group when the player was just looking for a heroic way to terminate their own character, and save part members or the whole group in the process. ANOTHER option is to let them have a new character....as a henchman or hireling of their current character. This gives them time to decide if the character is really what they want, and if their main character bites it, the replacement is already there and part of the group.

I had a La La Land once. The other players were examining a cursed throne. He insisted on sitting on the throne despite a dozen red flags and me asking them if they really wanted to do that. He exploded and had to make a new character. He learned his lesson and no longer tries to play D&D and MC at the same time.

I was a player in a Star Wars game a few years ago, with a player who just couldn't learn the rules. He was best friends with the GM, who while exasperated with the other player's inability to learn the game mechanics, the GM pretty much tolerated him. It was difficult as another player to constantly keep silent and not be one of those players who constantly tells other players how to play their characters. I also DM'ed for a player who would switch his characters. Every few sessions he would come up with a new character concept, and I had to come up with a way to let the old PC exit the game, and come up with a way to introduce the new PC. The first time it happened, I readily acquiesced, since the player had played the character for a few months, and it wasn't disruptive to do the switch, and I wanted to accommodate the player. Then we began a Tomb of Annihilation campaign, and he switched characters in the third session. Afterwards he switched characters two more times, before he ultimately had to drop out of the campaign. I think I should have been firmer with the player, not letting him switch so much in the second campaign. But the trouble is that a good DM should want their players to be happy. And I don't want to force a player to keep playing with a PC they don't want to play. I just don't know what the solution is. Even limiting the number of times the player can swap PCs may lead to an unhappy player.

A year later, and it hurts me knowing a friend of mine had MULTIPLE problem player tendencies. Argues rulings, powergames, metagames, steals the limelight among other habits. As a group, we had such limited experiences outside of him as a DM we didn't realize how bad his actions in general were, especially me when he was telling me how to run my game. The problem that I know with that type of player is one very few people address: killing the group by kicking problem players. I had 3 players and kicking him would have left two players to finish a story over a year in the making, and I just couldn't handle the thought of ending a campaign over him refusing to shape up

So in my first real session in DnD I've played since i was a teenager, we had a player that is: Rules Laywer, Limelight, Cheater, Instigator, Power Gamer, Metagamer, Player Critic, Puppet Master, Mr. Lala Land, The Bully, The Shy One (But he will chat with NPCs non stop!) and The Freakout. We found a real winner here.

The permanent newb drives me crazy. One thing I have done is to communicate with the party (via email/discord) in the time between sessions, requiring them to respond in character with something that would have in game consequences. Basically, it forces them to think about the game a little more and if they aren't willing to do that, I will gently ask them the question do you really want to play? because if you do, you need to......and if they don't do it, then you have your answer. It is tough because it can have real life social consequences, but you can always schedule a candy land game with them at another time.

for the example of how to deal with the DM Critic I legitamately thought of a reply: "Look I'm the DM, You are a player who doesn't necessarily know the full story, so don't tell me where to put my goblins.(edited because I can't spell great)

Here is my take on Trolls, when you live in a world where getting eaten by a troll is a real possibility, your parents would teach you that fire is effective. It's like how we say play dead with bears and make yourself look big for mountain lions.

DM: Why do you want to use your maul instead of a greatsword againt these skeletons? Me as PC: Greatsword as a bladed weapon deal slashing dmg. The skeletons have no flesh to cut. But you can still bonk em.

I have two friends in my current group, that have ever since the game started complained about another group member, but they didn’t complain to me about it. Instead they have chosen to complain to the player they have a gripe with whenever I’m not around, and whenever I ask about any problems they stonewall me, or act like what they complain about are just jokes. Now for an example these two recently said that the one player gets special treatment, because he does private sessions to make his weapons, and do tasks that would slow the main session down,and on one hand I can see how that might be interpreted that way, but it’s not because they can, and have done private sessions, but all they ever want is to go out, and make money, or pray to their goddess. The critiquing has gotten to the point that this one player’s love for DND is dying he regrets making his character, and he blames himself for what’s happened, and all day yesterday I tried to handle the situation, but one who plays a bear totem barbarian stonewalls and acts like nothing is a big deal, and the other a hex blade warlock complains he doesn’t like how his character is, compared to the one player but doesn’t want any solution I offer. So I ask youtube, do I kick these two players, or try and get this mattered settled in another way?

I'm pretty sure in a world where there are literal spells to turn undead, people would know what weapons are good against skeletons.

I love the subtle explanation of where the solution is. 😆

Unpopular opinion, but most metagaming doesn't have an impact unless it's really egregious. It's not the metagaming that's the issue, it's the blatant not tactful use of it. Plus most common monsters and their weaknesses would probably be common knowledge or have fairy tales or rhymes or sayings about them in world.

I have met another type you did not mention (i think) that i would call a whining tantrum. It's a player that refuses to accept their rolls and their outcome as a final say. Tried to steal an item and failed? "Can i reroll for no good reason whatsover?" When they are told no, they would try to get into the same situation immediately afterwards even if it doesn't make a sense. They would ask for rerolls, ask to try again like an ingame minute later, when being in game physicaly removed from the situation by other players, they would try to resist them and fight them just so they can have yet another go at the Thing™. They argue and demand and whine until they get their desired success or until they are told to cut the crap at which point they start to sulk, possibly leave the game in person or they get destructive in character. Met 2 like that. One changed his behavior between sessions so i think there may have been a conversation between him and the DM that worked, but the second had to be removed from the game completely.

Sometimes I have to refrain from becoming the puppet master, mainly because I enjoy working through challenges in combat, and that often means people need to make good choices. At the same time though, it can be frustrating when other people do things that are foolish or suboptimal which negatively affect you. Foolish example: When our monk runs to attack a different enemy while I (the healer) am at 1 failed death save, directly beside an enemy paladin who just cut me down on the first round of combat (beat my initiative by one, oh joy) Suboptimal example: Different group, had a wizard who wanted to be a blaster. I helped him make his character. He just... refused to respect resource management. Hated using cantrips, even when he was doing less damage spamming Magic Missiles. After every fight he would demand to long rest. Didn't matter if it was 8 am and we were literally still in the town that we were getting ready to leave that day(and by the rules wouldn't get any benefit since we just woke up)...didn't matter that our party included 2 warlocks, a fighter, and a monk...Didn't matter that Arcane Recovery exists...or even that our party was on a time crunch....Even with us saying that he could use cantrips and that a fight looked easy, he'd demand long rests. The DM was too nice about that shit.

I have a slight problem with metagaming myself, because I just remember random things from previous games and discussions and such. So when we encountered a troll, I immediately knew we should use fire and looked sadly at the DM: "I know what to do. Does my bard know? She could know legends about them? Maybe? Please?" And DM let me roll on History to see if my bard can use the knowledge.

Was really hoping for some guidance on the permanent noob. One idea I had (pending their approval, of course) was removing them from the party and tasking them with NPCs each session so that they can socialize and roleplay but don't need to follow a character sheet or spell list. But that requires a game with lots of NPCs. It's just exhausting to spend 3 minutes every time they take a turn explaining what to roll for a ranged attack, or what the spell they're casting actually does.

I have a friend who was a permanent noob. It’s not like they didn’t enjoy DnD and they weren’t really what I’d call a casual player. They just had a strangely hard time grasping the rules. They have since gotten past their noob phase which, everyone, themselves included, jokes about from time to time

There's a few types of problem players that you didn't cover, namely: "The Bigot" - players that discriminate based on race/gender/etc. "The Edgelord" - The dark broody player that doesn't want to interact with anything at all "The Weeaboo" - The player that tries to make the campaign into an anime "The Pervert" - The player that brings up sexual topics all the time "The Activist" - The player that brings their left-wing or right-wing ideology to the table

Oh there's the one problem player in our group, the eternal noob! He joined our group like at least a year ago and during our session last week the DM asked him to roll athletics and he asked "which dice is that?" LIKE DUDE??!! THE D20!! IT'S ALWAYS THE D20!!! He also has a bit of a Mr. Lalaland vibe, sometimes literally playing other games on a DS during the sessions ://

Why did I switch to the maul? Because I’m afraid of my blade getting caught in that rib cage!

Wizards who don't learn the rules: "I cast fireball." Wizards who do learn the rules: "I cast fireball."

Bit late, but I thought I'd weigh in. I once played with someone that was a combination of a "puppetmaster", "bully", and "switch out their character every session" player. They would see something cool in a class and talk us into playing it with that specific mechanic, even if our concept was not that. If we would decline to take his recommendation, he would swap out for a character that was a better version of what we were playing. Then when we would point out that they were making our characters pointless his response would always be that "he's not, we are still able to do his recommendation better than him." I remember I once had to respec a pf2 investigator from interrogation to alchemical sciences because they built a better CHA character and felt I should be playing it as an alchemist. I still found it fun, but I didn't appreciate having my hand forced.

Great advice! Communication is key in most situations.

With metagaming and trolls, I think a good way someone put it is "is the encounter more interesting or less interesting if they know this information?". With trolls, for example, if the player is forced to not know if they're weak to fire, they have to go through a hollow motion of hitting it with random things until they get fire. But if you do know they're weak to fire, then you have to deal with the fact that fire is a limited resource. Another thing is also that I'd argue understanding the monster manual represents a kind of player skill. Someone who's extremely familiar with the game should play differently than a newbie. Mind you, I wouldn't let them look through the monster manual in-session, but if they're reading through it between sessions and they say "Hey! Wait, I think I remember those things being weak to fire!" that's probably ok as long as they can justify how their character knows it.

My solution for Metagaming: allow them to make an Intelligence check to see if their character might know about it. Or simply give them the information if it makes sense given the Character (A Grave Cleric would obviously know an undead when they see one)

This all makes a lot of sense, I personally am guilty of number of 11, but I don't want to ditch my character. So, I just do small one on one, single session games with my dm with these new characters, which last about 2-3 hours. We do this when they are able to and feel up to it. This could be an idea for how to deal with number 11.

Thumbs up for the scetch at the start!

Fortunately, I haven't had a problem player but I figured out what to do if I get an Edgelord who sits in the corner and does nothing. First thing is I'd tell them they're sitting under an oil lamp which acts like a spotlight then have them roll a constitution check to see how sweaty they are.

I was a Shy player once, who hardly took action since what if the other players hated me for that? Then one day I reach the consolation that I'm a player also and the other player may not like the action I take but we can talk about that afterwards. First session I may sit back and observe the "new" players and only takes actions if they are indecisive and then come second session I'm having a graps on the players and take leader position if need be.

Skeletons don't bleed when I stab them, but they look like they'd go _crunch_ pretty well.

I would say, 'These skeletons are all bone. I think smashing will work better than stabbing or slashing.' Or ask to make a Knowledge [Dungeoneering] check to see if my character knows about skeletons.

So, my group has a sort of inverted version of the Freak Out? He freaks the hell out and regularly loses his mind... when something *good* happens. Rolled a Nat 20? It's like his favorite video game character just got added to Super Smash Bros. Killed the CR15+ monster? You'd think he just watched his team win the Super Bowl. The party's benefactor reveals a major plot point? It's like he saw the world's craziest MMA knockout of all time. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy he loves my game so much: this is my first campaign, and it had a really rough start, so it's a big confidence boost to see that the changes I implemented are being so well received. But he does take a little while to cool down again so we can keep going, and while nobody's said anything yet I get the feeling that it's starting to wear on a couple of the others. Does your advice change, based on that?

4:43. Objection! Goblins ARE terrifying! 99% of them are low CR trash, but you don't want to encounter the other 1%. BOOYAHG!

11. I have no problems with switching. But I have a “Chaos Fog” which eats pcs. But I had a diverse group or we were on military schedules. 12. The info dump. Drops lore, or other into at the drop of comment. Even if not needed. This especially troublesome if causes the table to drift. Reminding them to we here to play the game helps.

I would think switching from stabbing to smashing would be common sense when faced with something visibly bereft of stabbable tissues.

Tip for casual players? Help em configure reference stuff. Page number for all actions on their sheet and a quickreference. "Umm, want to bull rush, page..."

I've had an eternal noob. First cronicle we played, se did as the night cast [The assasin]. Se was... unhealpful, to say the least. Never remembered the information she gathered, never remembered her abilities [Except a few wel praised moments] and never had iniciative. We had to tell her were to go becouse she block herserlf out everytime. So, in the second cronicle I gave her the most noob friendly character I could manage to build. A Dawn cast [DPS tank] purely made to protect her teammates and do damage. After 4 years, 3 out of 5 close calls of tpk and the actual last tpk, was her fault. She went in the group becouse she wanted to date one of the players. But then he got married. And the focus just... vanished.

A campaign we had a year ago had a chaotic stupid forbolg wizard that decided to be a necromancer wizard after another player said he was going to be a necromancer. He claimed to be chaotic evil and to know how to play one but he caused so much grief but also was our first dm and good friend so we didnt want to take the advice of kicking him out of the group but the human necromancer and I (air genasi fighter) decided we will answer this in character. We planned the ambush without our dm and he let us have the reigns when the event happens so we got shopping for a cattle brand. The next session half way through during a long rest in an inn the wizard nuked him with Magic Missile and I decided to Action Surge. We non lethally got him to 0 hitpoints and branded his back with MH for murderhobo and when we woke up we talked about how no one likes this behavior and our characters would behave this way in response to his actions and had him handcuffed to me for the rest of the session. By the next session he improved so much and we unhandcuffed him and saved our ass as we just became lvl5 and he took tiny hut.

I don't know, my opinion of metagaming is the reverse of what you described. I actually agree with Seth Whats-His-Face here: It's kinda unreasonable to think that, in this world where monsters and undead are commonplace, the characters don't have ANY idea on how to deal with them and what they're weak to. Vampires don't even exist in real life, but most people will know to stake them through the heart, throw them into running water, or expose them to sunlight. Now of course, it's a different story if the player just straight up memorized (or worse, just looks up in the moment) the monster stat block, especially if it's a rare creature or one that might not even be thought to exist. In the skeleton example, I don't see how you even need to justify it unless their character has 6 INT. You wouldn't use a longsword against a guy in full plate IRL if you have access to a spike-y polearm or a warpick or maul, something that delivers more force and might get through the armor, one way or the other. It's the other part that I think you shouldn't do: assume every encounter is winnable, unless it's a forced, unavoidable encounter that you can't even retreat from. In games it's perfectly fine to make an encounter you can't win at your current power level. If I make a camp of 30 orcs, I didn't make it so that it's winnable with a direct charge. You have to be clever and separate it into six 5-orc fights instead.

Just watched the first part and now the second one released

ok about meta game thing: a case was made because as a player i would know that a katana and/or a gun would have an identification of the smith in the hilt. i asked the dm whether the case is the same in terms of dnd and i was called with meta gaming, which i don’t think i was. help me out here?

If Player = Problem /then have Conversation. If Resolved Play Game. If Resolved = No /then Player leaves game. Also If Monsters are real in your setting then knowing their strengths and weakness would be part of the lore myths and tales. I know the strengths and weaknesses of Vampires in our world lore and they aren't real.

What about the player who carries character conflict into player conflict? Or harbors (silent) resentment towards a player for another's characters actions?

1 Metagamer Sometimes the information isn't metagaming in-context. "Why would he know that Trolls are vulnerable to fire?" "You remember when I said I was from Longsaddle? Yeah, fun note- They're right next to the Trollmoors, and one of the key duties of the Riders of Longsaddle is to do targeted burns around the Trollmoors to keep the troll population in check." (Always read the backstory) OR, "Dude, I have burned basically every creature we have EVER encountered to this point, save for the ones literally MADE of fire. What did you THINK I was going to do?" (Know that in the heart of every Wizard is a true pyromaniac) Switching off Greatsword to Maul against Skeletons, "Alright, DM, you tell me: Where is the vital part of their anatomy that I can stab with a sword?" (Make sure, before you accuse Metagaming, that it IS actually Meta, and not common senses tingling on the part of the player, like "If it's fire, use cold") 2 Player Critic: Sometimes the critique carries weight, and the critic is someone who is agitated with a behavior they find problematic, and that isn't being addressed. So, we've got a guy who, for the last several years, has played almost all druids. The problem of it is, he never knows his abilities as druid, even the basic Wild Shape stuff, has never managed to learn his own spell list, and doesn't pay attention to combat until it's his turn, resulting in pretty terrible clog ups in almost every session that isn't just basic downtime as we have to help him with his character every single round. 3 DM Critic: Kind of the same thing here. This especially comes up at tables where there are a lot of houserules, or an overage of "Rule of Cool". Yeah, Rule of Cool is fun for the players getting free stuff, less so for the player who actually built their character to do the thing you just handed out like spare gum. The problem lies when they're micromanaging the DM (Sadly, a lot of these folks ARE DMs themselves.) 4 The Puppet Master: Yup, nope, this one's poison for any group. There's a difference between helping a player who is having problems, and trying to take control of their character. 5 La-La Land: Yeah, this one's low-level, and it's only issue is it's chronic. 6 The Bully: I hate bullies, there will be one warning, and then there will be one less player at the table. 7 The Shy Player: pay attention for side causes, because there may be player issues at the table, or they've had a bad time at another table, and you're inherited the problems that those players and/or DMs caused. 8 Permanent Noob: I have a standing rule that after a certain amount of game sessions has passed, you stop receiving aid, and if necessary, I will start limiting turn time, because for the love of GOD, this one drags down the DM and the other players, who should not be having to deal with this. Leniency shown to kids (Doesn't matter if she's playing since she was nine, she's hit puberty, and all sorts of stuff goes weird in that quasi time, whatever the gender). 9 The Freak Out: Definitely get a one-on-one, even if you have to halt game, because this is almost always something outside of game that has the player on edge. 10 Character Switcher: Yeah, got this guy at my table. I had to put down the hammer on this one, wherein I would be like, "Look, this keeps coming up. You keep jumping characters, which would almost be fine if you didn't keep tying your characters into key elements of the campaign, but I have to keep coming up with all of this extra plot because of it, KNOWING that, without doubt, you will dip out for a new character. So no, you can play a new character when your characters dies, or in the next campaign."

That's metagaming-part is one of the advantages of the openlegends rpg system. That systems has guidelines and examples, but doesn't rely on pregenerated enemies.

I had a "la-la land" dice cheater who after six or more years with the same character still did not know how to play their character, what their spells did, etc. And the ONLY wanted to play a spell-caster! - over half a dozen times talking to them aside only changed the dice cheating. And they showed up contagious a LOT (and this was years pre-covid). We lost a player due to the above player, and eventually the rest of the group voted the trouble player out, which resulted in the self-exiled player coming back.

I have a player who constantly makes bad decisions that put the rest of the party in danger or straight up stall the story. I've spoken to him about it but he genuinely thinks his ideas are good and doesn't see the problem with them. What do I do?

“ how would his character know that trolls are vulnerable to fire?” Maybe because every child over the age of five would know this. And of course they would know that it’s easier to break the bones of a skeleton with bludgeoning rather then try to stab them in the organs that they CLEARLY DO NOT POSSES. Having more then one brain cell doesn’t mean your metagaming. If he yells at the sorcerer to not cast lightning bolt on the shambling mound however, then that would be a case of meta gaming . Same with the golem absorption ability and the crag cat spell Reversal

Yikes. I like using strategies as a group and having an attack plan for combat and I am guilty of being the guy who complains about everyone else's actions. But! Only when I was in a bad mood and I put a stop to it after being called out.

Why switch to the maul when you're fighting skeletons? Same reason you would switch to the maul against armored opponents: blunt objects are better at distributing energy through a hard surface. You use different weapons and tactics for armored or unarmored combat, and since skeletons have no external soft tissue they're effectively armored. That's not metagaming, that's just knowing your tools. Also, swords can get stuck in bone. Bones are a lot easier to smash than they are to cut. *Anyone who uses a sword regularly should know this.* For that matter, so should anyone who's ever eaten meat, or observed someone else cutting meat.

Yeaaaaaa! Gary's back!

I sometimes feel the puppet master, as I'm playing with two forever-newbies. They forget they have rage, spells, features and leveling their character up.

I am personally a problem jokester. I try to keep it to a minimum, but it comes up. It was glossed over, but thing is most jokesters are also into what is going on and enjoying the play. As long as it is theme joking vs railroading jokester. Main thing though is if the jokester talks over the DM, that is where it really becomes an issue. Edit: Puppetmasters are my big trigger. When somebody starts "suggesting" what I should do it bothers me, and I just stop playing and go on autopilot if they want my PC to be their second PC.

Intresting case of metagaming I once experienced. I was playing a eladrin ranger with fey as favored foe too so fey to 11. And we encountered three hags. Rolled a nat20 to figure out it's hags. GM went a bit on how it's three and its totally hags... So I called out we should kill one of them to disrupt the coven. I might've metad there. But I noticed my attacks where resisted. So I did another int check and oh boy it's night hags. (we where level 2 btw) So I called out we should retreat, we are too weak for this. And out of character I went "oh that explains that, it's fiendish resistance. It's silver or bust and we don't have silvered weapons, yea no chance." and another player picked up their silver coins to try and attack them.

You may have touched on this issue before, but it's something that has been occupying my mind lately. What's the difference between ruining the game and simply playing very well? Or another way to put this, at what point should someone tone down their competitiveness/how well they do, if at all? Should a player ever intentionally tone down their skills for the sake of others at the table, or just be honest and play to the best of their ability all the time and expect everyone else to just suck it up? In my own experience, I know that I sometimes tone down my abilities to give other people a chance in the limelight, make the game more interesting, etc. At the same time, it sometimes feels dishonest, similar to fudging rolls. What is your opinion on this?

There are a few comments about players having 'general knowledge' about the world to know some monster weaknesses. Although we have a lot of monster general knowledge on Earth we have formal schooling for years and hours of world spanning nature documentaries with 20th level Teledude Knight Sir David Attenborough. The players 'general knowledge' would maybe be much more local.

Well some metagaming like trolls and skeletons can be easily be fixed with down time research in character "i used the 2 days of downtime to have learned about a obvious weakness"

if I had a DM critic in my game i would just say "deal with it, or leave my games.. run your own if you dont like my DM style" that is, only if a single person would be rude about saying it. if multiple people point something out, maybe it is me and not them (yea, that damn majority Mind I got from DMing kicks in, making me thing the few are in the wrong)

The metagaming examples weren't the strongest. As a DM, I'd rule that a skeleton is obviously hard to stab, but that bones are crushable, making it reasonable to use a maul. I would also argue that trolls are a common enough threat that commoners would know how to try to defend themselves against them: fire. However acid, I would say is a lesser known attack against them. Fire, though, just makes sense to use against any fleshy or furry beast.

Well how common are trolls and how common is it know they are flammable?

DM: Player you always use your great sword so why are you using your maul to fight the skeletons? Player: well being proficient in great swords and mauls my character would see the skeletons, notice the wide gaps between the ribs and think, "gee this sword looks pretty skinny it probably would just pass through the gaps or worse get stuck in the bones. Maybe I should use a weapon that is good at smashing and breaking things like a giant hammer... Oh wait! That's *exactly* what I have. If going to discuss metagaming (character knowing something only the player would know) then it is also important to discuss metacognition (player knowing something only the character would know). A person living in the game world for 30 years spending the first 28 as a soldier learning how to use a variety of weapons would have some understanding of the world and how there weapons work. A wizard with burning hands would have come across books (which could still call for a roll of some kind) that might have had situations where burning hands would be useful. A rogue with expertise in stealth would have the confidence to try to hide from the guards to get into the castle. An easy way to think of it is if it's on your character sheet then the character would be aware of the knowledge they have, everything else would be metagaming to a degree. (I mean players can see die rolls and tell when their 14 attack hits the enemy and figure "oh so the AC is at least an 14" which to me isn't metagaming because health and AC are abstract concepts beyond the game world while yes trolls being weak to fire would be more concrete, a player would see the trolls skin peeling away and quickly turning to ash or something as their arm is burnt, it screaming in pain. Characters can't just be treated as though they have a blank mind and zero knowledge of the very world they live in or their own skills and abilities. This goes for PC and NPC so the merchants know about the friend cantrip or charm person spell for example and might have at least a second person to help deal with business transactions so they can keep track of things while others were charmed and help the others to seek retribution if the party tries to run off with their gold and inventory. No one. Is. Clueless.

As a DM, I don't actually have a problem with metagamers. Take the troll and fire example. If I throw a vanilla troll at a group of players who know how to kill it and they all steadfastly refuse to metagame, the result is a bunch of people pretending not to know the solution to a problem. That doesn't seem fun to me. If I really want to avoid metagaming in a particular instance then I just change monster stats. It's not a lot of work. Maybe this particular troll has eaten some crazy mushrooms and now it takes radiant or necrotic damage to stop him from regenerating.

I guess I was a "player critique" at some point when I first started playing D&D. I didn't voice it out, I was the quiet kid at school but my DM did notice that I get an annoyed face at the Druid on her turn cause we all started playing together and it's been a year, but she still doesn't know her class/race features and spells, takes forever to pick a spell on her turn when there are 6 players, she could have taken the time to analyze the fight and pick a spell. I was playing a Cleric so how do you justify that? LOL!

I don’t get the problem with them switching weapons? someone explain please 👌🏻