When is it okay to kick out a player for their political views?

As an easy rule of thumb: If they do or say anything that indicates that they are /pol/, kick them the fuck out and block them.

No you can't just kick people for being a Trump supporter user.

Or rather you can, but if you do you're the asshole not them and deep down you know that or you wouldn't be asking our permission to do it.

If, IF they're preaching about it constantly and disrupting the game then yeah, that's one thing.

You got beef though? Get yourself some mustard and rye bread, make yourself a sandwich and put it in your mouth before you put your boot there.
Or better yet, discuss with them why they might support someone you don't see the appeal of. Have you ever considered you might learn something?

Not even an American, but fuck political polarization. You didn't get your way this time.
Pick up your balls, dry your tears, take a deep breath and work on listening to people for the next four years and maybe he won't get a second term, if you actually take a step back and stop thinking shit like 'Maybe I should ostracize the untermensch who voted for Trump from my sight, they cannot possibly have any valid reason for what they did'

Insulting, harassing, assaulting or otherwise acting negatively towards someone they are meant to be playing a team game with.

Don't kick someone out because they believe white privilege is real or that immigration will be the death of the West. Kick them out only they start acting negatively towards another member of the group due to their own political views, usually through pointless name-calling and shit-stirring.

I like the MMO rule for this. Don't attack or aggressively promote any big business, any religion, any politics, any nationality. It's basic etiquette, even if your politics are aligned it can still detract from the enjoyment if it just turns into a political circle jerk.

On the other hand I think it's perfectly fine to use politics as inspiration for characters. Especially when it comes to using the most overblown and flawed version. This is essentially where Planescape came from. Dave "zeb" Cook created the factions as if they were drunken college freshmen at 4am in a bar arguing all the worst philosophies taken to their extreme no matter how wrong they knew they were.

I hear enough of politics everywhere literally all the time. Keep it off the table, I don't give a shit who you voted for

"Because I'm retarded" is the only valid reason to be a trump voter. "Because I'm retarded and don't read the news" is the only valid reason to still be a trump supporter.

"Nobody understands trump supporters they have a valid reason" is a stupid idea advanced by stupid people that think 'centrist' means if one person wants to eat a baby and another person doesn't then the logical compromise is eating half the baby.

Just fuck off, you're not subtle or clever, we're used to this shit at this point.

You're misinterpreting me. I'm saying that by framing it a certain way you can call anyone a massive dick and claim their politics are hurting you. The inverse would be "you're trying to drive my race extinct and steal my guns, liberal dickwad."

Either dozens of millions of people are retarded or you might be wrong.

...

Say what ypu will about Trump, but if anything voting for him was the smart choice. Every politician hates him, so his hands are Fucking tied when it comes to anything meaningful. If Hillary had gotten in, she'd actually be able to push her shit through.

Fuck career politicians as a whole. Good luck with your little safe space where everyone who disagrees with you is just stupid. Clearly the people you're calling stupid should thank you for pointing it out and vote for the opposite thing instead.

when its your damn house and your damn game. its your right to kick anyone out for any reason. whether or not its socially acceptable well... thats a different story.

Well, there's also the chance for both. Granted, it's more likely that those millions are on both sides of the fence, but still, voting for one terrible candidate over another doesn't make you a genius

Never is. Youre an adult, act like it. If they bring it up every session, ask them to tone it down and focus on the game. If you disagree with their views, man the fuck up and ignore it.

is a 0/10 Trump troll.

I'm curious, does anyone seriously think this person is a liberal?

No, the reality of this poster is clearly clear.

If someone is being annoying for any reason, why not kick them? I find people who endlessly connect every topic to their political beliefs, even the ones I agree with, irritating. And if we ask them to stop, and they refuse, they would probably be happier with people who engage with that shit in the first place

Honestly, the internet has become such a malicious mire of false-flagging and concern-trolling that it's almost impossible to know whether this is a stupid liberal, a stupid /pol/ack pretending to be a stupid liberal or a stupid liberal pretending to be a stupid /pol/ack pretending to be a stupid liberal.

It's the second. And it's OP. Don't doubt the obvious, user. You might be wrong sometimes but you'll be right 99% of the time.

It's always okay to kick out a player. If this hobby can get to the point where kicking out players never requires a justification, everyone will be better off. We only struggle because we have to come up with an excuse to get rid off people we don't like, but if it was just as simple as "Don't like, kick" everyone would quickly migrate to play with people they did like.

>nobody on my side could possibly be an asshole; it must be a falseflagger

If you don't think the Left has its share of assholes you've been living under a rock since 2001.

Nice try OP.
>it isn't the politics you braindead /pol/lack
>it's the ham-handed delivery

Any leftist on Veeky Forums knows better than to talk shit like that, as it'll end up with a whole bunch of other shitposters piling in on them.

I'm saying this as a leftist myself.

Why are you asking the internet? For your purposes, it's okay as soon as it's okay with you. Are you so insecure that you need other people to share your convictions in order to feel confident about holding them? Because you should really feel more confident about what you believe. If your group is playing in your home, then they're guests in your space. If you don't want to put up with their shit, then just get rid of them.

>When is it okay to kick out a player for their political views?

If they're injecting it into the game when it isn't warranted or applicable to anything or if they're otherwise constantly bringing it up as a means to hen peck another player to death.

Thats kicking someone for being an annoying shit, not kicking them for voting differently than you. Acceptable.

Out of curiosity, has anyone here heard of the ultimatum game?

Player A gets money and can offer any amount to player B. Player B can accept the offer in which case they split the money as player B proposed, or they can reject the offer and nobody gets anything. The rational strategy for player B is to always accept, but they'll usually reject offers of less than a third of the pot. Even when they know the game isn't iterative.

People aren't rational or fair by nature. I'm fine with that until they're actually doing something disruptive.

You can call spite irrational if you want, but no real choice happens in a vacuum. There are instances where forcing someone else to lose is worth eating the opportunity cost.

If they're Nazis, yes. Feel free to punch them in the face, too.

My thoughts regarding this experiment every time I've heard it exactly.
I'll sacrifice a dollar to deny you a hundred, jackass.

You can always kick players for any reason. They are worthless scum, a dime a dozen, only there because you have the creative and mental fortitude to make their fun for them.

I frequently kick players for expressing opinions I find dumb, like thinking DnD is a good system. I've often precluded players with experience in d20 from playing in my games at all.

Keep at it OP. Maybe a b& will believe you.

youtube.com/watch?v=P-cPo1wqxD8

Same time its okay to kick someone out for any views they may have.

>If they frequently interrupt the game with the stupid shit they believe in.

>If they create a tense atmosphere for everyone else.

But basically, if whatever they are doing is making other people not enjoy the game, its time for the boot.
Whether its religion, politics, an annoying habit, being disruptive, hogging the spotlight, attacking other players (verbally, physically, or in game) or some other generally obnoxious thing that makes other people not want to play with that person.

I had to kick a very good player out a while back because he constantly brought up his weird religion he believed in and tried to make it a major religion in D&D. Constantly tried to derail the campaign everyone was invested in, taking up valuable game time to try to convert commoners to his religion. Which basically boiled down to all of his NPC interactions being 20-30 minute rants about what he believed in.

Anyone got the greentext of the guy attacking a party member that was trying bend the game into some woman-centric uptopia by using diplomancer powers to convince people to kill all men?

Bleh. People always report the results from this study wrong.
People USUALLY will take the offer, but player B's willingness to accept the share is proportional to how much testosterone they're on right now.
People seek fairness by nature, but can only maintain a rational outlook on what is fair for extended periods of time with intense training and mental discipline.

Not the OP.

Have killed Nazis.

How about you?

I'm talking rational in a utility sense. It's one of a set of experiments that illustrates problems either with using money to measure utility or with the narrow assumptions people make about what utility is.

I'm with player B. There are certainly nonzero deals I wouldn't take.

The dictator game is more charitable despite the name. Player B doesn't get any choice in that one, but player A almost always still gives him something.

Damn is there a ceiling on the age limit to post? You must be ninety.
>as if you're not actually just shitposting

Source? You're sure this wasn't a variation on the original?

There isn't, and I am old. But not 90.

No. I killed Nazis in the 1990s.

Now it's all the rage again.

Do regale us.

When it's being disruptive. If they sideline the game continuously because they want to rant at the rest of the group, killing everybody's groove, they're getting the axe. Doesn't matter if it's about a show or book we like, it doesn't matter if it's a political opinion everyone else agrees with.

Of course, the first step is to talk to them about it. If they keep being shitty after that, out they go.

When it gets in the way of the game. One of my players is a legitmate nazi, believes all jews should be gassed and eagerly awaits the advent of right wing death squads in the USA.

However, he is also an amazing roleplayer and doesn't bring his political side to the table so I could care less what he does in his spare time.

He was probably fighting in eastern europe in the balkans

Do they now?
I think you'd be surprised.
I'm not really leftist but I go out of my way to post my controversial opinions on /pol/, because the reactions are worth it

>if they're right wing, block them

Leftists, everyone.

>I can't attack Games Workshop

The fuck you say.

When they post about it on Veeky Forums

I find it best to ban all non-game-related/out-of-character discussion outside of breaks. If you start randomly talking about [INSERT TOPIC HERE] during our Greyhawk campaign, you had better believe that the NPCs are going to question your character's sanity and increase the DC of your social skill checks.

DnD-drone scum, kill yourself.

This. I value the satisfaction I get out of punishing you more than I value the dollar. So how is it irrational to take the thing I value more (my satisfaction) over the thing I value less (the dollar)?

Political affiliations aren't uniform across platforms. I've had pretty good experiences on tg with the same sorts of leftists that might be more obnoxious elsewhere.

What happens on pol is pols business. I get enough of that bunch outside their board.

Neogeorgist. Maybe geolibertarian.

The problem with the ultimatum game is that it's phrased as a game but lacks a set win/loss condition, which frees up players to invent their own. By the rules of the game, player B actually holds all the cards by determining whether or not anyone gets anything at all and, by extension, sets the real terms of negotiation. Any intelligent player A knows this, and knows that if they want anything at all, it's actually in their best interest to make player B the best offer they can to avoid eating the larger opportunity cost. So long as player B sets their personal win condition as getting away with at least as much money as player A, then they will win every time by rejecting any offer less than half. It only makes sense for player B to accept any offer given to them, no matter how low, if any nonzero amount of money fulfills a win condition.

I'm the first guy you linked and I think the actual shitposter got the idea from me, I was just trying to illustrate how "being a massive dick is grounds for kicking" can be twisted to "anyone I don't like should be kicked" with a COMMON liberal argument.

It's pretty standard in its genre. What's the win condition in the prisoner's dilemma?

If I disagree with my players' politics, I kick them, no questions asked. I also don't ask about my players' politics. Which means if I find out about them, it's because they brought it up.

>holding such an utterly insufferably soulless position and castigating people for having actual beliefs
You're disgusting and insane.

Even as an evil nazi, I'd much rather spend time in the company of the most vehement SJWs than with bottom-feeding contrarians like you.

Only if things get awkward because of it.
t. Nazi /pol/ack.

When they try to force their views onto other players or become unnecessarily hostile about their views.

Alternatively when they make a big deal out of their character sharing their views.

Seems like a simple enough answer to me, here's your (you) OP. As for the rest of you, don't forget to sage.

Using Georgist tax policy to rectify common libertarian ethical/economics problems where they interface with the tragedy of commons (plus a modest basic income or citizens dividend) is disgusting and insane?

When they wake the neighbors and/or scare children/small animals in the vicinity with their autistic screeching.

Alternatively, when they refuse to drop conversations that are obviously frictional. This is game night, not debate club, get your shit outta here.

It essentially comes down to the person in question not being a massive twat.

I always flip with PD because I don't know what the other player's thinking. Part of the prisoner's dilemma is that the player's can't talk to each other. If I can't exchange information with the other player then there's no reason to even consider their benefit.

I'm actually a little insulted

In a non iterative version, you've made the rational choice

Your utter lack of engagement with the zeitgeist of the era you're fucking living in is disgusting and insane. To arrive at such a base, mundane, anti-revolutionary opinions in the midst of an intense, global, and ideological conflict is evidence of your wretchedness. Wriggle in filth like the worm you are.

If Kirbo's okay with Hitler, that's good enough for me!

...

I know that feel.
>A guy in my regular D&D group is a borderline Neo Nazi.
>Hates gay people.
>I only know about this because my other friends have told me about the rants he goes on about.
>He's never said anything mean to me because he respects me too much.

Warn them first. Not in the "keep it up and I'll kick you" way, but in a "I'm finding your views personally offensive brah, if you can't shut up about Crooked Hilary for the game I am going ot have to kick you."

I wish I could get access to how tos on therapudic D&D that Wheelhouse does so we can deprogram these people.

I mean, like, I knew a girl who GM'd and she told this guy to stfu because dude, you're talking about me.

And then it just kinda clicked in my head

It's easy to let bygones be bygones if they're not talking about you. But if I was a Jew and there was a Nazi at my table I'd probably start concealed carry.

If it doesn't affect the table or make its way into the game then never. Even that isn't really work for all cases. Best is if it starts making others uncomfortable then is when you step in. I play with a member of the DSA and a Republican and there was no issues cause we were all friends first and foremost.

If you don't like playing with people whose political opinions you don't like then instead found a group based on a shared political outlook and you won't have that problem.

My political ideology is only 40 years older than yours. It's also less contrarian and has a better charismatic figurehead.

But is it your place, as a player in a game of pretend, to scrutinise their political beliefs? No offense man but tabletop is not and never has been a nuanced forum for political discussion. It's about having fun and playing pretend with a group of people.

If you don't want to play with someone then by all means just leave the group, nobody should be forced to do anything regarding tabletop. 99% of these types of scenarios or problems with "that guy" can be solved by just leaving your group and starting or finding another one.

Here's a serious question for you: What do you propose as an alternative? We interview people about their politics and forbid people from joining? (Ignoring that 99% of people don't actually have any coherent political outlook)

>tfw firmly center
>tfw just want all these /pol/ and /leftypol/ people to leave
>tfw half of these people shitting Veeky Forums with the bullshit probably don't even play tabletop
The election was a mistake. I blame both parties for allowing use to have to choose between sociopathic/megalomaniacal pathological liar and a spastic manchild shadowrun Megacorp CEO.

The 2-party system was a mistake, as was the game of hot potato the parties played with the Dixiecrats.

Also, this seriously people, it's okay to learn and practice towards having tolerance towards opinions and view points that disagree with you, this isn't 1690s Salem, Massachusetts people.

as a nazi, I can say a lot of us are fine with individuals that are gay, bi, etc, it's just the idea of indoctrination we hate. But I'm sure that you, like most gay people, are a totally decent person.

sorry bro, I do play tabletop quite a bit if that helps.

I think you're a decent person too user.

No unless they bring them to the game itself

aww, thanks man!

Communists should be shot.

real story; I'm one of those nazi fucks, who plays in a game run by a self-described turbojew.
The terrible part is that we actually agree on a lot, and point each other to stuff we think the other might appreciate or find percolating our peanuts.

When they ignore the lich in favor of forcing gay marriage on a fictional kingdom.

When they start bringing them to the game/never shutting up about them moments before and after the game. If they start quoting politicians currently "serving" it's an insta-kick. Quoting french royalty is fine. Quoting stalin is fine. Quoting hitler, macarthur, ahnuld, shakespeare, or other relatively old politicians is fine. History provides us with some really cool or funny one-liners to borrow from these guys for game sessions. But out of game? Modern politicians? I would just call you a retard and tell you to get out.
Watch that edge.
Kirby is worse than hitler by a factor of millions.
>gets cake stolen
>goes on a world-wide rampage to get cake back
>eats alive anyone who crosses his path
>punches planet in half for a strength contest
>throws entire kingdoms into chaos by killing their monarchies and scattering their food storage to the winds
>dooms uncountable amounts of innocent peasants to starvation because he eats literally everything edible he comes across
I mean, yeah, he protects the people of popstar from having nightmares every time they go to sleep. But it only makes it all the more cruel once they wake up and realize their family is starving and they might have to eat ol' fido. They live the nightmare. Kirby is the third horsepuff of the apocalypse, famine.

Are the Kirby games any fun? I've never played them. Where would I even start?

...

Sure, Kirby games are plenty fun if you don't inherently hate cutesy stuff. The gameplay between various games ranges from baby's-first-platformer to actually challenging, the powers are fun to discover and use, and the soundtrack is consistently easy to listen to.

Personal recommendation to start with is Kirby Superstar Ultra for the Nintendo DS (or an emulator), since it contains multiple shorter games leading up from the older era that you beat to unlock the newer ones, which does a good job of introducing new players to all of the mechanics before throwing real challenges at them.

I reccomend starting with the older ones first, then superstar, before moving on to the newer ones on gameboy sp and crystal shards. I've never played the wii ones, but the kirby style of gameplay hasn't really changed in 25 years, I can't imagine it's too different. New features have been added over time, but it's always retained that same kirby feel to it. Seriously, pick any kirby game, they're all fun, and the dreamland series is pretty quick to finish. I'm partial to crystal shards myself, you can combine powers in that one. I don't think they ever implemented that feature in another kirby game. A shame too, I would spend hours just trying to combine different powers in that game. Sometimes you'd become a walking fridge, sometimes you'd turn into a volcano. Fun times.

They sort of reimplemented power combinations in Squeak Squad? It's nowhere near Crystal Shards, though. Mostly "you can mix Fire or Ice with various powers to give them Fire or Ice effects", and even then I think the only combinations were with Sword, Bomb, and Wheel.