It's not really that much different than dealing with munchkins.  You can disallow it as a playing group or find a way to make it work in the campaign concept.

I currently have one of these-see my thread here for a small example of some of his recent behavior-in my group. It's not just a drive to be unique, which I can live with, and easily deal with. (Rotwang's hot shot of common sense is my initial tactic in any dealings with my players, and generally successful.) However recently he has expressed his very vocal desire to make game breaker characters-characters that specifically exploit loop holes in the rules, or that require some sort of revision of the rules on my part.

Now I get part of what this is-the guy in question is a gifted player, who is and has always been leaps and bounds ahead of most of the players in attendance, skill, knowledge (Both in game, and real world stuff), and other arenas. So a guy like this needs a little extra special to make it a challenge at times.

But some of it is that he has come to expect the spotlight, and with in the last year that's shifted-because we've been able to game steady the other players have begun to seriously close the gap. (And in some cases exceed his  performance.) And I think that he just doesn't know how to deal with that. So he picks up the ball, and refuses to pass it. His characters become more and more unsuited for group dynamics or play. (Why do you adventure with these guys has become an all to common question lately.)

So I'm somewhat at a loss as to what to do. I am working hard to ensure that his ball hogging doesn't ruin other peoples fun, and so far it's been handled. But I feel a little bit aggravated that I have to put forth the extra effort-not a lot mind you, because to me this is still fun, and a challenge.

Quote from: RPGPunditI think that's the problem: Players who pull this shit do it as a way to try to "force" the GM to give him a lot of attention, but that only happens if the GM is willing to create new and special subplots just for the guy who doesn't fit in with what everyone else is doing.  This is unfair to the rest of the players.

Personally, I try to make new and special subplots for all the characters, simply because it's an easy way to motivate the PCs to get involved in stuff.

On the other hand, I try to make sure each of those subplots is interesting for more than one character, which tends to involve taking elements from each character's agendas and trying them together. For example, if one PC wants to steal a particular gemstone, and another PC wants to take over the local thieves' guild, I could tie those in together so that for political reasons the thieves' guild is especially keen to see the person who owns the gemstone robbed, and any crew that's willing to risk such a heist can a) expect a certain amount of help in terms of intelligence and resources from the guild and b) win props with the guild leadership if they pull it off.

For me, the problem with the "odd man out" character is that his aims and goals will tend to be incompatible with the other characters', so it's difficult to integrate him properly into the party and make his subquests interesting to the other players. Fortunately, it doesn't happen much in my play group these days, though I've seen it - I know one player who has two character types, bloodthirsty psychotic and antisocial mystic, and he will always pick the least appropriate of those two for any particular game (and in lots of games neither's appropriate).

Quote from: RPGPunditHow does one deal with that?

RPGPundit

Games are supposed to be fun. Is this player ruining yours and everyone else's fun? If the answer is, yes, then don't invite him to the game. If he asks, why, tell him. He might see your point and you can come to a compromise, but probably not.

This may also be a question of taste in genre purism.  

Some people like it when the purity of a genre is messed up -- i.e. when superheroes have to go without their spandex, or one of the good guys turns bad, or when there is one out-of-place character amidst the others.  Actually, none of the examples sound even hugely out-of-genre.  For example, there are a number of superhero teams where one member has no superpowers, like Batman in the classic Justice League or Robin in Teen Titans.  The 13th Warrior has an Islamic man (from Spain, I think) amidst Scandanavian heroes.

Quote from: RPGPunditHis characters aren't even necessarily "Lone wolves" (that's a whole other complex), but they always have to be something outside (or at least pushing) the limits of what you would normally be supposed to or allowed to play in the given game/campaign.
 
How does one deal with that?

When I'm GMing, I hate that guy.  Sadly, when I'm playing sometimes I am that guy.  
 
Assuming the player isn't being deliberately disruptive, then their character choices either (a) reflect a desire to try something "different" and "interesting" and/or (b) are a result of a lack of shared vision between player and GM over the game world (that is, the player might realise they are pushing boundaries, but they don't realise just how far they are pushing things because they don't "get" the game world).
 
In the case of (a), consider rewarding players for playing "in type".  That is, hand out bonuses during character generation for players that create particularly genre/setting-appropriate characters.  And provide ongoing rewards for players that produce game-appropriate passages of play.  Playing a character outside of the normal is easy.  Playing within the boundaries of the world is so much harder and realistically it should be rewarded.  Particularly in the case of historical or historically-inspired games, or in licenced settings, because the players probably need to do a bit of their own research.
 
In the case of (b), well you might need to put a bit of effort up front into communicating the nature of your game world.  Give the players some appropriate material to help them learn the world - ie, point them to wikipedia entries or web pages, lend them books and/or DVDs, put together your own campaign primer, make a campaign poster.  Whatever it takes to help give them a clear vision about what is appropriate for the game world.  
 
It might also be useful to use pre-generated characters too.  Give them a selection of character frameworks to use and customise to their personal tastes.  If they don't like using pre-gens (and most experienced players don't), only allow them to create their own characters after a few sessions.  That is, after they've been playing in the game world for a while.
 
As I said... this all assumes the player isn't being deliberately annoying.  If that's the case, just ditch them

Couldn't you just say "no"?  Tell him you'd like him to play something more in line with the campaign premise.  If he refuses just don't let him play.

Quote from: RPGPunditHowever, the problem is actually with the rest of my players: several of them have complained about his non-fitting-in characters, and the fact that he insists on doing this in EVERY SINGLE GAME I run.
RPGPundit

My problem wants to play the bad ass mage EVERY SINGLE GAME of GURPS I run.

Mage (now WW but where everyone is a mage in GURPS Fantasy) Campaign - bad ass mage (ok this was about mages so good here)
Thief Campaign - bad ass mage ( oh well we now have foggers who fog up divination spells for major thefts)
Guard Campaign - bad ass mage (this is getting old)
50 pt Campaign - a not so bad ass mage but the baddest he could make in 50 pts

Current Campaign for GURPS 4th - bad ass mage with Magery 10 (yeah yeah I know but I had to see what happened)

Frankly I wish I had some advice for you. For my player it just something that seem to be part of him. The only pop psychology I can come up with is that the Mage campaign was so fun that he tries to recapture its feeling in every subsequent GURPS campaign I run.

On the flip side he does come up with different and interesting backgrounds for each mage. As for his Magery 10 character, he is a powerful wizard but is so lacking in other skills that it really harmed him in my Fantasy campaign which is run sandbox style.

Quote from: estarMy problem wants to play the bad ass mage EVERY SINGLE GAME of GURPS I run.

Mage (now WW but where everyone is a mage in GURPS Fantasy) Campaign - bad ass mage (ok this was about mages so good here)
Thief Campaign - bad ass mage ( oh well we now have foggers who fog up divination spells for major thefts)
Guard Campaign - bad ass mage (this is getting old)
50 pt Campaign - a not so bad ass mage but the baddest he could make in 50 pts

Current Campaign for GURPS 4th - bad ass mage with Magery 10 (yeah yeah I know but I had to see what happened)

Frankly I wish I had some advice for you. For my player it just something that seem to be part of him. The only pop psychology I can come up with is that the Mage campaign was so fun that he tries to recapture its feeling in every subsequent GURPS campaign I run.

On the flip side he does come up with different and interesting backgrounds for each mage. As for his Magery 10 character, he is a powerful wizard but is so lacking in other skills that it really harmed him in my Fantasy campaign which is run sandbox style.

I really sympathize with this poor guy.  In every campaign, there's one jackass who just has to play a wizard.  I am this jackass in my friends' games.  We are the same, him and I.

I feel your pain. Let me just say one "word": Drizzt.

Testify!

Quote from: estarMy problem wants to play the bad ass mage EVERY SINGLE GAME of GURPS I run.

Mage (now WW but where everyone is a mage in GURPS Fantasy) Campaign - bad ass mage (ok this was about mages so good here)
Thief Campaign - bad ass mage ( oh well we now have foggers who fog up divination spells for major thefts)
Guard Campaign - bad ass mage (this is getting old)
50 pt Campaign - a not so bad ass mage but the baddest he could make in 50 pts

Current Campaign for GURPS 4th - bad ass mage with Magery 10 (yeah yeah I know but I had to see what happened)

Frankly I wish I had some advice for you. For my player it just something that seem to be part of him. The only pop psychology I can come up with is that the Mage campaign was so fun that he tries to recapture its feeling in every subsequent GURPS campaign I run.

On the flip side he does come up with different and interesting backgrounds for each mage. As for his Magery 10 character, he is a powerful wizard but is so lacking in other skills that it really harmed him in my Fantasy campaign which is run sandbox style.

Hahaha.  I have one of those, except he's a ninja not a mage.  

Pete

Ok I got another one

There is this guy. We will call him J. J is a nice pleasant guy very easy to get along with. His strategy sense is not quite all the way there. It definitely leads to humorous situations when he makes the less than optimal choice. Plus he is prone to gaffes. One time he founded a potion shop and made this woodcut sign out of scrap wood. It said

Marcus' Potion Shop
Potions for Sale, Cheep!

Note: The misspelling is not an error on my part.

Anyway J's one annoying quirk that he named his character either Marcus or Carl. One would be Marcus, the next Carl, and back to Marcus. Granted he never named an elf, or a dwarf and anything grossly out of whack Carl or Marcus. But nevertheless over a dozen characters he made each a human named Marcus or Carl.

So fast forward a number of years. J has moved and now married. He comes back to visit and we all get together to talk about old times and catch up. One thing we knew that his wife thought RPGs was stupid as all hell.

It turned out he had a kid, a boy. "Hey congrats" we said "What the baby's name."

"Marcus" he replied

All three had a utter look of astonishment that he named his kid after his character. I pipe up.

"J? Does your wife know that you named your first born son after one of your D&D characters?"

He gets this pinched look in his face and turns red with embarrassment.

"No! and please don't tell her" he answered as we all burst out laughing.

Enjoy
Rob Conley

Note: While it seems a bit obsessive and that I picked on him. It is more of a case that he really likes the two names as opposed to being into his characters. He is a really solid guy and a good friend. Makes for a funny story tho.

One of the Nutkinlanders used to claim that (due to reasons unexplained) he had to change his first name, and chose that of his favorite character.

Some people need something to bounce off of in order to define their character. As long as it's not game breaking I don't have a problem with it, although it can be exasperating when the same player tries to subvert setting assumptions over and over again.

One bloke I used to game with was a fiend for this. He could only think in terms of contrast. As time went on his characters became wilder and woolier, to the extent that they were becoming unviable in terms of the setting canon. He thought it was a symptom of being cool and rebellious, bucking the system in new and innovative ways that no one else had thought of.

After months of this we eventually had a sit down where I told him the effect was quite the opposite of what he was shooting for-- his zaniness was predictable, his off-the-wall approach was leading him to be typecast as "that guy who just doesn't get it." For a brief time that he changed, and actually came up with some decent, imaginative characters that intergrated with the gameworld in a plausible way. Unfortunately his old habits crept back after a while, so I had to cut him loose. I've only so much patience, and running a relatively realistic renaissance setting (WFRP) with his proposed Half-Dinosaur Clown was a suggestion too far.

Kill him, as ever I mean the player.

It just destroys the internal logic of the game and sucks up attention.

When you have a Roman in ancient China you have two choices.  Realistic reactions, in which the entire campaign becomes people wondering who the Roman is and reacting to how alien they are, or ignoring it in which case the game world lacks any real internal sense.

I've had this, some PC type who is so out of setting that realistically they would barely be able to interact without major discussions every time about where they came from and who they were.

If you're a competent roleplayer you should be able to make an archetypal character interesting, if you can't do that playing an elf ninja ain't gonna help you.