Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 ced1106 wrote:


Another IRL is raising children. Look at the history of how parents were supposed to raise children, and you'll see trends, unsupported claims, and other ways to compound the stress of a parent. Go ask Dad about the days when kids were praised for everything because nobody wanted to hurt their self-esteem, or the days when ADHD diagnoses shot up and kids were prescribed drugs when they were just acting up like kids do.

Oh, yes, those beautiful times when neurodivergent children were yelled at, tied to their chairs or beaten until they start behaving like "normal people", don't we miss them?

Let's ask an average Dad what he thinks of the change (or any change for that matter):


Interestingly, specifically for wargaming, I remember most of toxic behavior from early 2000's and Warhammer Fantasy Battle. Nowadays either communities matured, or games I play now attract different types of people. Or I just randomly encounter fewer such players.

 Overread wrote:
I think one thing with wargamers is that when our models are on the table our opponent is going to touch/be near them.

We trust our opponents to handle our models the same as we do - which when you then see someone willing to throw their models around; makes you just that bit concerned that they'll be as ham-fisted with yours on the table.

Or worse, someone with visibly grubby hands touching your stuff.

I’m not exactly a germophobe, but man. If you look dirty? Don’t touch any of my stuff. I don’t know where you’ve been.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Eilif wrote:
I agree that they're all toys, but they aren't toys that can be just tossed into a bag. I agree with Overread that it likely shows a degree of immaturity and lack of emotional regulation if an adult begins to just toss their minis in a box as a response to loosing. Certainly I'd see it as a red flag to steer clear of gaming with that person.

Yeah. If someone went off in a huff because they weren't rolling hot and slammed their minis into a box, that'd be a red flag.
But to me, by far the bigger red flag is the sore loser bit, not the cheap case bit.

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply at all that the type of container was the issue. A plastic tub with layers of mattress topper eggshell foam can be a perfectly safe mode of transport if you're careful with your minis.

I use recycled small, shipping boxes lined with paper towels. It works fine.

However, I am the first to admit that I can get upset and be a poor player. Typically it happens to me when there are other outside stimuli (like stress at work, lot's of life changes, etc) and then a unit or approach underperforms dramatically or consistently on the table. This can make me a bad player to play against. Therefore, the cheap transport maybe a warning sign afterall!

When I know I am at a low-energy state; I just do not game with strangers. I stick with pals and friends. If I am low enough, I will just stick with solo-gaming. That way, I do not risk hampering other people's experiences at the game table.

 Easy E wrote:
I use recycled small, shipping boxes lined with paper towels. It works fine.

However, I am the first to admit that I can get upset and be a poor player. Typically it happens to me when there are other outside stimuli (like stress at work, lot's of life changes, etc) and then a unit or approach underperforms dramatically or consistently on the table. This can make me a bad player to play against. Therefore, the cheap transport maybe a warning sign afterall!

When I know I am at a low-energy state; I just do not game with strangers. I stick with pals and friends. If I am low enough, I will just stick with solo-gaming. That way, I do not risk hampering other people's experiences at the game table.

Even good people can have bad days.

 BorderCountess wrote:
Problem players are going to be problem players no matter what they're playing. The problem is the player, not the game. For these players, the point of the game is to win.

For me, the object of the game is to win, but the point of the game is to have fun.

There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

Eh you can get that with any situation where two players come together with different expectations and don't outline them before the game.

A "fluffy" player and a "pro" player can easily have that no matter the game when one builds a "fluffy lore accurate" army and the other builds a "competitive meta-list"

 Overread wrote:
Eh you can get that with any situation where two players come together with different expectations and don't outline them before the game.

A "fluffy" player and a "pro" player can easily have that no matter the game when one builds a "fluffy lore accurate" army and the other builds a "competitive meta-list"

Ideally, those two lists wouldn't be so far apart.

Agreed with Dudeface also.

As the villain of most scenarios (Casual Knight Player), I can assume that a lot of this boils down to poor communication.

Prior/During/& Post game.

I like to talk (shocker, huh?), but I've noticed that a lot of players have trouble communicating their wishes about what they want from a game and from an opponent.

I've been reading this thread and contemplating questions to ask a new opponent. That will hopefully create either a smooth, enjoyable game.... or enough foreknowledge that says we shouldn't play against each other.

Think something like that would work?

Dudeface wrote:
There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

I'd've shone that particular spotlight on the "all tournament prep, all the time" crowd, myself, regardless of which GW game they're playing.

 Dysartes wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

I'd've shone that particular spotlight on the "all tournament prep, all the time" crowd, myself, regardless of which GW game they're playing.

Maybe, at least they'll let you play whilst be a condescending ass with a superiority complex. I've known someone pushed to chinacast as a requirment to play because they didn't have the right mark of armour for the hh campaign by contrast.

Dudeface wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

I'd've shone that particular spotlight on the "all tournament prep, all the time" crowd, myself, regardless of which GW game they're playing.

Maybe, at least they'll let you play whilst be a condescending ass with a superiority complex. I've known someone pushed to chinacast as a requirment to play because they didn't have the right mark of armour for the hh campaign by contrast.

Stories like that keep me from associating with the HH30k crowd.

Those kinds of players tend to do a good enough job of isolating themselves to the point where I don't really concern myself with them.

 LunarSol wrote:
Those kinds of players tend to do a good enough job of isolating themselves to the point where I don't really concern myself with them.

I have no trouble getting other players to isolate themselves from me.

Dudeface wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

I'd've shone that particular spotlight on the "all tournament prep, all the time" crowd, myself, regardless of which GW game they're playing.

Maybe, at least they'll let you play whilst be a condescending ass with a superiority complex. I've known someone pushed to chinacast as a requirment to play because they didn't have the right mark of armour for the hh campaign by contrast.

I would rather not play than deal with someone who's going to give me crap for not having the right mark of power armor.

I posted years back about my experiences with a "TFG" I nicknamed Timmy. He played 40K and was an avid cheat and rules lawyer to the point that he would insist that only the FW Shadowsword model could use the Imperial Armour stats, and that my GW Shadowsword had to use the notably inferior stats from a GW splat. There is a lot of content from my time playing him that I can write up if people want, but the ultimate TL;DR is that he was a controlling and obsessive dick, and I should have taken advice from the guys here and cut ties with him. I also found he bullied money out of a mutual (now nolonger mutual, he cut ties as well) friend whom is one of the nicest people I have had the pleasure of knowing, taking advantage of the side effect of the guys medication to con him into handing over money for minis he didnt even want.
As an ironic side note, Timmy contacted me yesterday to ask if I had any old IG stuff left, seems hes taken to playing Krieg. Humorous for someone whom once looked down on Guard and Guard players.

To be a bit more on topic though, my experience of TFG's and problem players has shown that they mostly play GW games, 40K, Age of Soymar, or the like. Cant speak for card games as I never played those competitively. Most alternative games - Midgard, Oathmark, Battletech, Infinity, etc, are chill and have good players. Warmahordes was, despite its design and playstyle, very chill in my area.

WHF most certainly has more than it's fair share of obnoxious players and snobs. When i started back with Middle-Earth, there was more than one occasion when they would come over and mock it as the inferior fantasy game and players. Turned me right off the game for a while and it's still there even today with the constant back biting against AoS and Middle-Earth still. Never known such an insecure community before.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
WHF most certainly has more than it's fair share of obnoxious players and snobs. When i started back with Middle-Earth, there was more than one occasion when they would come over and mock it as the inferior fantasy game and players. Turned me right off the game for a while and it's still there even today with the constant back biting against AoS and Middle-Earth still. Never known such an insecure community before.

To be fair, AoS did come from the killing off of WHF, and its a completely different game. People where understandably pissed.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
WHF most certainly has more than it's fair share of obnoxious players and snobs. When i started back with Middle-Earth, there was more than one occasion when they would come over and mock it as the inferior fantasy game and players. Turned me right off the game for a while and it's still there even today with the constant back biting against AoS and Middle-Earth still. Never known such an insecure community before.

To be fair, AoS did come from the killing off of WHF, and its a completely different

Spoiler:

and far shallower

game. People where understandably pissed.

And? Doesn't give the playerbase the right to harass kids or other people playing it. You're proving my point right here.

They can be pissed at GW all they want, but that doesn't justify taking it out on players of other systems.

Some of it is just "my tribe better than your tribe" bravado that some people take too far/don't know how to turn off.

You'll find one or two will push it in a group and others might well just follow along or don't challenge it.



Sometimes it gets wrapped up with other things - like its Age of Sigmar VS Old World but the fanbase of both happen to also be different generations so it kind of reinforces itself cause now you've got two "tribe" elements against each other.



The other aspect is often people don't openly address it. They let it happen and then never challenge or place any repercussions for the behaviour. So it persists.

I'm not certain that GW games are unique in the fact that they attract douchebags.

I believe they exist in every game, across the board. It's just that GW games have a much more public venue, with a more vocal fanbase then say, Flames of War.

 LunarSol wrote:
They can be pissed at GW all they want, but that doesn't justify taking it out on players of other systems.

Given the amount of gloating talk/posts from AOS players in the aftermath of the Old World getting exploded and AOS making its debut, I wouldn't be so hasty to make it it was either unprovoked, nor one-way traffic.

 Dysartes wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
There are other types of problem players though, those who project standards and their narrow view of "right/fun/correct" and lambast you if you don't comply. This is a thing you sometimes get with the more 'serious' settings and historicals. In warhams land it's HH that seems to attract these types more than others.

I'd've shone that particular spotlight on the "all tournament prep, all the time" crowd, myself, regardless of which GW game they're playing.

This.

Usual caveat? Nobody Is Doing It Wrong.

But….regardless of game system? If you are insistent that every opponent you ever play must play you solely on your terms (narrative, competitive, using tournament house rules, literally anything beyond base rulebook, codex and FAQs)? That person is a problem gamer.

In my Till Monkey Days, we had a cadre of wee scrotes who insisted any game in the shop must be played using their preferred tournament pack, and that every game they played against every opponent must be tournament practice.

They. Were. Wrong. My shop, not yours. Now….when they played among each other? No problemo, go for it. But don’t bully, cajole or harass anyone else into your preference. And you absolutely do not rely on your tournament rules halfway through a game without having agreed it first.

Main example there was my old, by the book but you don’t see it often, Big Monster Dark Elf army. No magic. Just as many big gribblies as I could. It played closer to Super Heavy Wood Elves, relying on cunning manoeuvres, flank and rear charges, attained by my stuff being far more mobile. Also, Large Targets with Fly being able to see over intervening terrain, and use that to declare and complete charges. Sometimes being extra sneaky to line up what looks like two flank charges, which if you turned to face in your turn, could turn into two Rear charges.

But this lot? No no all woods are infinitely high because of this rule from a tournament. A non-official rule. A non-official rule pack I’d never read, nor had the opportunity to read, and had certainly never agreed to abide by.

Again, when playing among like minded informed opponents? Go wild, you crazy kids. But don’t inflict that as a new, non-agreed standard on everyone else.

Any activity, work, hobby, geeky non geeky etc you are involved with will eventually attract problematic people. Now, when you have "competitive games" that exacerbates those behaviours, it's part of life and not exclusive to a specific game.

I have seen in it in Warmachine, Warhammer, FOW, magic etc. a bit everywhere, all these games are equally prone to attract problematic people, its more about the crowd you have in your geographic area than about a specific game.

It's not just the people in your area; its what the community leaders of the social groups your in allow to happen.

Not this doesn't necessarily mean whoever organises/runs the club/store/group - the community leader can often be them, but it can equally be another in the group that rises as leader.

What the leader(s) of the group permit can also have a dramatic impact on behaviour of individuals.

As humans we are more than capable of behaving in very different ways within different social groups. That loudmouth, swearing bolshy person at the pub when the footy is on for their favourite team is an entirely different person compared to the quiet, patient mannered father at home with his kids.

On some level its on the individual how they behave; but on the other is what the leader/group accept as behaviour.

 Overread wrote:
It's not just the people in your area; its what the community leaders of the social groups your in allow to happen.

Not this doesn't necessarily mean whoever organises/runs the club/store/group - the community leader can often be them, but it can equally be another in the group that rises as leader.

What the leader(s) of the group permit can also have a dramatic impact on behaviour of individuals.

As humans we are more than capable of behaving in very different ways within different social groups. That loudmouth, swearing bolshy person at the pub when the footy is on for their favourite team is an entirely different person compared to the quiet, patient mannered father at home with his kids.

On some level its on the individual how they behave; but on the other is what the leader/group accept as behaviour.

Community Leaders of clubs, regional tournaments etc are people too

Joking aside yes I think we are saying the same thing.
Im going to give you a little example I recently experienced myself.

Last year when I was looking to buy a new house I went to different cities and towns, that I never been before, just to check out the area etc.
One of the side quests I had for myself was checking the wargaming reality of each area.
I would find the main stores and browsed them and after a while I would look at the painting cabinet and praise the painted miniatures and asked if I could take a picture of said painted miniatures on display.
You would be surprised how different the answers were and you would, with this simple but intrusive question, figure out the mindset of said store leaders.

Mind that Im the classic quiet and polite 50 year old and some of those "leaders" in stores were borderline socially challenged and paranoid while others were inclusive and curious.
I can guarantee you that those different stores will have very different dynamic and attending crowds.

I'm with you on the importance of leadership, and jerks will misbehave to the extent that they are allowed.

However, I depart here...

 Overread wrote:
. That loudmouth, swearing bolshy person at the pub when the footy is on for their favourite team is an entirely different person compared to the quiet, patient mannered father at home with his kids.

Folks usually aren't better in private. That loudmouth at the pub might be worse at home.

 Eilif wrote:
I'm with you on the importance of leadership, and jerks will misbehave to the extent that they are allowed.

However, I depart here...

 Overread wrote:
. That loudmouth, swearing bolshy person at the pub when the footy is on for their favourite team is an entirely different person compared to the quiet, patient mannered father at home with his kids.

Folks usually aren't better in private. That loudmouth at the pub might be worse at home.

Oh true, it was purely one extreme example. You can certainly get people who will be bullies at work and abusers at home; or timid at home and even more cowardly at work etc....
My point was less that people act opposites and more just that people are capable of selective behaviour within different social groupings and situations. Thus again leading back to the core point that if the leaders of a community permit certain behaviours then there's more chance people will perform those behaviours even if they are quite capable of not doing those things in other social groupings.

So... what's the solution to dealing with "problem players" at the table?

What do you do when you are across the table from one of these fine, upstanding pillars of the gaming community?