by Allan M. Heller

Created on: September 02, 2007

The player who constantly refers to the rulebook to settle his frequent arguments with the Dungeon Master can spoil the game for everyone. The DM resents the constant challenges and attempts to undermine his authority, and the other players become sick of taking time out of the game for 10 or 15 minutes at a stretch to settle disputes which never should have arisen in the first place. The obvious solution is to kick the offending player out of your campaign. But sometimes he will be a friend, or someone who is such a good role-player that despite his shortcomings, you want to find a way to deal with him effectively.

I like to cite a chapter in the classic maritime novel Mutiny on the Bounty. After having deposed the tyrannical Captain Bleigh, the crew elects Fletcher Christian as their new captain. Christian accepts, but tells the men, "If you want me to be captain, I will, but I mean to be obeyed." Tell the quarrelsome player that you are like Fletcher Christian. If this fails, ask for a vote of confidence, and ask the players to indicate with a show of hands if they want you to continue as DM. If they want a change, maybe you're not doing such a stellar job. If you have to switch to being a player for a while, give the rules lawyer a taste of his own medicine.

For rules that are ambiguous, I feel that the DM should have the final arbitration. One of my players gave me a suggestion that I like, however: if all of the players strongly disagree with the DM's decision on a point of play, the DM should capitulate.

Appeal to the rules lawyer's adult sensibilities. Calmly but not too condescendingly explain that D&D is just a game, and that the purpose is to have fun. "We're all grown-ups here," I find myself occasionally saying. "If your fighter/rogue/wizard/whatever dies or loses a magic item, how much difference is it going to make next week?"

An especially difficult player in one of my campaigns once began debating with me over the weight of a young wyvern. I ruled that the young wyvern, which was one-fourth the size of a full-grown wyvern, weighed one-fourth as much, and was still too much for his character, who was a gnome, to lift. He then attempted to expose the scientific flaws in my argument, mainly that one-fourth the size did not equate to one-fourth the weight. "It doesn't make sense," he insisted. I pointed out that if he wanted to get technical, there were no such things as wyverns or gnomes, and that the whole game didn't really "make sense." Unfortunately, I eventually had to throw this player out of the game anyway, but this strategy might work with someone else.

Finally, if you really don't want to boot the argumentative player from your campaign, or you're not the confrontational type, resort to subterfuge. Give the next monster that the party fights an additional +1 or +2 to hit the offending player's character in combat, or conversely, subtract one or two points from his character's attack roll. When the player makes a saving throw, make the DC a little higher. Is this cheating? No, DM's prerogative. And is subtly punishing a player who is ruining the game for everyone really that bad of a sin?

Learn more about this author, Allan M. Heller.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.