I'm looking for GMs with shared experience to give me some advice here. I recently put one of the three groups I GM for on permanent hiatus, partially because of real life complications, but also partially because I find myself having difficulty GMing one of the players.
First some notes on my GM style. I like miniatures, and maps, but I like them as a tool for keeping track of movement in close quarters dungeons, and spacing, etc. for the purposes of combat. Otherwise I'm very content to "storytell" through much of a campaign. Two of my players, in that group of three, adapt very seamlessly to transitioning onto and off of a grid map. One however seems to not understand that you can't just move wherever you want to on a map. He believes that he should be able to move wherever he wants and that I need to adjust my timetable of things to how quickly he goes from place to place.
My problem with this player is that he'll simply pick up his miniature and move it from one place to another without clearly showing which squares he took to get there. This makes it difficult for ambushes, and trap triggering, but I hate having to stop an encounter and say, "now, can you show me exactly which squares you took to get there." The problem really stems from, at least insofar as I can tell, his inability to adapt to using grid-maps the way they were designed. Yes they slow down play, and yes they create a "board game" effect. (That's an argument I've heard for not using miniatures in RPGs but that's another thread.)
I've tossed around the idea of going all maps, all the time, but that creates a LOT of up front work for me, and forces things to move rather slowly throughout.
In addition this particular player, has shown a propensity to rules lawyer only when he knows the rules benefit himself. Meaning if I make a mistake on a rule (yes I do make mistakes) and it benefits the PCs or himself I won't hear about it. If, though, I make a mistake and it hinders them I'll hear about it right away. This has happened so often that I have now come to realize this player knows a bulk of the rules better than I do. In fact one time I just asked him flat out if he wanted to be the GM instead. (I haven't been able to be player character in so long I wouldn't mind handing over the reigns.) His response to that was "no."
Any GMs with similar experience? How did/do you handle it. Any advice would, and is, appreciated.
|
Start fiating it. If he's not going to take the time to show how he got from point A to B, you decide how he did it when there's an ambush. To get the point across faster, have the ambush happen when he is most out of position or vulnerable. If he complains 'that's against the rules' tell him that he wasn't playing by the rules when he moved. If he tries to argue a rules point after you've made a decision, say 'that's my call as the DM, we can talk about it after the game, but I'm not going to interrupt the game for this'. I have a player who points out errors I make, and if I'm not sure he's right, I tell him we'll talk about it after the game, right now the game is more important than the letter of the rules.
Honestly even if you were willing to engage in more relativistic movement (no battle map, DM adjudication) it seems likely that this guy would still "teleport" around the battlefield.
Personally I think the game works best if exploration and social interaction mode is more relativistic as it goes a bit faster (some might disagree) and then only pull out the battlemat when you are going into absolute position mode (typically combat but sometimes traps).
Basically give the players a starting zone where they can position their PCs as desired. The position the monsters. You can even do this simultaneously. This represents their initial starting position. Typically if the PC are surprised I make them set up first and reduce the encounter distance and the reverse if the PCs surprise the opposition.
This enables the characters to get an initial lay of the land and establishes absolute positioning within the tactical space. Movement past that is strictly based upon speed and positioning (although flight and other unusual movement styles can make things interesting).
Overall if a player always picks up a piece and moves him without showing the path then have a polite conversation on why it is important that they use the maps as designed when they are present. (It sounds like you have done this.)
Then if they still refuse to do that, fine. Let them move the figure as they choose (within reason... a halfling cannot move a figure 200 feet on their turn.) But after the movement is over and they place their piece assume the character took the LEAST favorable path (again within reason.) Tell him to make his saving throw as he hit a trap in route... or ask for his AC as he gets hit with a AOO... or ask for his acrobatics check due to walking over marbles.
At that point they player can choose to continue with possible unsafe behavior due to their play style, but you still get to enforce the game the way you want to. Most players will then find it in their own interest to pay more attention to the map and move their figures with more caution and slowly.
These seem like fairly banal problems, frankly, and not worth canceling the game for the other two players. Unless you have other examples of poor play, it may be that you're overreacting due to your RL issues.
On the "teleporting", presuming everyone wants to stay with minis, you have to be consistent and explain to him that everyone has agreed to follow the same rules, which include clearly indicating paths. You need to make sure you do this for the bad guys and NPCs, too, and make sure everyone else does, so he doesn't feel like he is singled out.
As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point). We rarely have this at our table. When it does come up, I allow a short (no more than 5 minutes, usually one or two) discussion to allow the player to make his case, and those of us who are most familiar with the rules to comment, then make a decision and move on. If someone doesn't agree with the decision, I offer to discuss it after the game or before the next one. We have three folks who regularly GM, have been playing for 30+ years, and are pretty familiar with the rules. Generally, when we put our heads together we can come up with pretty good rulings that everyone will buy off on. I encourage you to recruit some other players who are more experienced to participate in these discussions and offer their opinions, so it isn't just you against him. And when he's right and you know it, admit it quickly, thank him for the correction, and move on.
|
|
As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point).
I'm amazed by how often my friend is sent into a pout because I hold him up to the rules. *shakes head*
"In addition this particular player, has shown a propensity to rules lawyer only when he knows the rules benefit himself. "
That is a big red flag! Both the rules lawyering, and the map stuff point to, what I describe as an "adversarial player." To this person, "winning" at all costs is more important then other aspects of the game.
I found that as the levels progress, and there are more and more rulings required, that this player will suck the fun right out of the game. By mid levels, every encounter will hinge on him finding fault with the situation, while you bend over backwards trying to keep everything fair and moving along at a good pace. Since it is a lot easier to run one character and find fault, then juggle a whole encounter, they will nit-pick as much as they can.
You can try all kinds of confrontational, and subtle ways to correct these behaviors, but people have fun in different ways, and you can't really change someones whole outlook on the game, unless you could put them in the GM's seat, which this player isn't willing to do.
I say, drop that one player, and see if you can salvage anyone else you can from the group.
|
Start fiating it. If he's not going to take the time to show how he got from point A to B, you decide how he did it when there's an ambush. To get the point across faster, have the ambush happen when he is most out of position or vulnerable. If he complains 'that's against the rules' tell him that he wasn't playing by the rules when he moved. If he tries to argue a rules point after you've made a decision, say 'that's my call as the DM, we can talk about it after the game, but I'm not going to interrupt the game for this'. I have a player who points out errors I make, and if I'm not sure he's right, I tell him we'll talk about it after the game, right now the game is more important than the letter of the rules.
This is pretty much the best advice, it's more or less how I treat beginning players. I would try and be fair about how I interpret their activities but would have them move in the most direct path unless they say otherwise.
Also, if he moves too far tell him it will take him two turns to get there or that he won't be able to perform other actions since he's double moving. When his next turn comes up just say "You are still moving" and move on to the other players/ NPCs.
In other words, let him express his activities however he wants but interpret them as best you can within the rules.
As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point).I'm amazed by how often my friend is sent into a pout because I hold him up to the rules. *shakes head*
We ruthlessly bully any pouters into dealing with it and moving on. We find that throwing small, hard and/or sharp objects at them also helps. I have a crystal d30 I keep handy for just that purpose. And one of my buddies still fondly recalls the time he made a d4 actually stick into one guy's forehead when he was being a jerk. :P
And one of my buddies still fondly recalls the time he made a d4 actually stick into one guy's forehead when he was being a jerk. :P
"My problem with this player is that he'll simply pick up his miniature and move it from one place to another without clearly showing which squares he took to get there."
"This has happened so often that I have now come to realize this player knows a bulk of the rules better than I do."
Your player is a cheater. Anyone who knows the rules as well as you indicate knows exactly why it's important to declare the path of travel.
I have two suggestions, of which you will only need one. The best choice will depend on the personality of the player(s).
1) Don't play with cheaters. Tell him clearly that not declaring your path of travel is cheating. If he tries his crap again, kick him out.
2) Stop declaring the path of travel for enemies. They'll just zip into reach to hit him, run through rough terrain, or whatever they'd like. When he starts to whine about this, and you know he will, tell him that NPCs will obey the rules when he does.
|
|
We ruthlessly bully any pouters into dealing with it and moving on. We find that throwing small, hard and/or sharp objects at them also helps. I have a crystal d30 I keep handy for just that purpose. And one of my buddies still fondly recalls the time he made a d4 actually stick into one guy's forehead when he was being a jerk. :P
I'm beginning to think I should revoke his eladrin privileges if he continues to sigh dramatically when I remind him his alternate form is a standard action to change into. He's also going to lose his turn if he doesn't hurry up and pick what spell he's casting in under a minute.
In the Dragon magazine article "Front-end Alignments", this type of player is classified as "Chaotic Everywhere".
All players have their likes and dislikes. One of the players in our group hates our critical and fumble card decks, as it (in his mind) makes criticals worthless, since you often end up getting effects instead of multiples of damage.
Talk to him, find a middle ground, and affirm your position as the GM.
Rules lawyers come in two varieties in my experience; the ones who believe the rules should be adhered to in all regards, and the more common one that uses the rules to win. I "rules-lawyer" sometimes as a player if there is an misinterpretation of a rule so glaring that it annoys me/is going on top of our heads dualwielding nerf-bats. But I also GM, so I know better than going too far, as I know how irritating it is to have the flow broken.
As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point).I'm amazed by how often my friend is sent into a pout because I hold him up to the rules. *shakes head*
My friends tend to get annoyed when I correct a rule that, when corrected, hurts me, rather than helps me.
Its a habit.
All players have their likes and dislikes. . .Talk to him, find a middle ground, and affirm your position as the GM.
I don't think we're talking about a player with a different set of preferences.
Easy fix, you decide ROUGHLY the path he takes, it means that:
He always provokes AoOs
He always gets ambushed
He always triggers trapsIf he tells you to to do the movement again (of course avoiding the traps and ambushes he didn't know) tell him that it was the path described by his hand when moving the miniature and there is no Undo button in this game. If he says that it isn't true ask him to apologize for saying that you lie. If he still doesn't get it show him the door, he will never be able to play a RPG so stop wasting efforts with that player.
+1
Apply the D&D variant on the Gandalf Rule - A wizard is never late, he always arrives exactly when he means to.
D&D - A character who is unclear of his movemements (or just being a plain old pain in the neck), always takes the route that is potentially most detrimental to them.
As you are the only one who knows what is actually on the ground, you can move traps, create traps, adjust monster stats etc however you like on the fly to make the game function. Assuming you keep playing with this particular character, if he complains that he always triggers traps etc, simply point out that is why you need him to clearly indicate his movement path.
It certainly isn't a "banal issue" as someone above suggested given it has caused the game to be brought to a halt.
But given the rules lawyering annoyance as well, it sounds like this guy is basically not much fun to play with. If you enjoy the company of the other two players, why don't you try continuing the game with just the two of them? I've always found a fun, small group better than a large group with a problem player(s).
Thank you all for a ton of great advice. I really like the advice, that was repeated by a few people, that I make sure he takes the path of most resistance. I'm pretty sure if/when we get back together for our next session if he continues the "teleport" movement I'll be sure that that happens. I'll definitely be thinking about pulling him aside at some point also, to make clear my expectations for minis and maps as well. Thanks to all who posted advice. I agree that his particular style doesn't mesh well with the others in the group, so removing him all together is a very viable option down the road as well. We'll see what happens.
When a player opts to move his character on a battle mat, it is your preference that the player move his figure 5 feet at a time up to his maximum movement
. . .
and that he should wait for the GM to indicate all is well before each 5 foot increment is traveled.
First half, yes, you should move square by square. Straight lines in clear terrain, 10 feet per 'jump' is common.
To the second half, no, you don't have to stop every square and look at the GM. Presumably the GM is watching and can either yell "stop" if something weird happens, or just back you up a couple squares if you would have been stopped.
Having skimmed the thread, I need a bit of clarification:
When a player opts to move his character on a battle mat, it is your preference (and apparently the preference of a few other folks on this forum) that the player move his figure 5 feet at a time up to his maximum movement, and that he should wait for the GM to indicate all is well before each 5 foot increment is traveled. Also, it is bad form to count squares in your head, and that simply moving your figure to the movement's terminus and indicating verbally/physically (without going 5 feet by 5 feet) what path you took is likewise poor form.
Is that the currently professed state of what the folks in this thread believe to be proper movement? Or is the OP complaint centered on a failure to communicate the movement a character move described?
I won't speak for other GMs, so I'll just speak as the OP. The character in question makes zero indication as to the path of movement. He simply picks up his mini and moves it to the desired location, sometimes beyond a normal move action, and assumes that I, as the GM, will adjust how many rounds have transpired accordingly. (Sometimes this means I have to indicate to the other players that they too should make two move actions, and if they want to make a standard action in between let me know and we'll adjudicate that as well.)
Now, do I want him to stop at every five foot increment and look up at me to make sure it's okay? No, but I do want him to at the very least indicate a line from start point to finish point, so that I can then let him know if anything was triggered in that movement line.:D Ninja'd by TriOmegaZero and Ryzoken
Edit: Ninja'd by Blueluck too, apparently.
|
|
I'm not entirely certain of some of the rest of this. It sounds like folks are DEMANDING players move their figure one square at a bloody time and if they don't they should have physical violence or expulsion visited upon them.
They are also talking about out of combat movement on the map, not during combat. So telling the DM you go from point A to B without the line between doesn't tell him if you hit a trap or not.
In regards to OP: If your player can sharpshoot your rules, he knows the rules and is 'bypassing' the dangerous (to him) parts. Where I play, that is called cheating. It is up to you to resolve that as an issue (and never a fun one).
In regards to "How should movement be done?"
Like Monopoly:
Count your movement costs as you move so you can do both 1) show path, and 2) validate distance. Do this in your head before your turn if you like, but when it comes to it, pick up your little car and count, 1-2-3-4-5-6 spaces. Sadly it does mean it feels more like a board game. But, the option is run it sans "grid" and convert "6-squares" into 6" get a ruler and go that way. In any event, as there are nasty things (traps, ambushes) along the way, we (as players) do need to know the path of movement. And, unlike Monopoly, there are many paths to get to the destination...
Bear in mind this does not mean, 1 *look at the GM* 2 *look at the GM* 3 *look at the GM*... it means move until 1) you are told to stop, or 2) you run out of move, or 3) you get where you were going.
Many times I have considered going to a grid-less system (sorry, 40K player ;) ) but the sticking point is AoO. The grid automaticaly accounts for these, in a simple (if unrealistic) method of tracking AoO. If you did not have the grid could you imagine the hassel of trying to adjudicate AoO and especially if different models have Reach? *wow* that makes my head hurt.
GNOME
Start fiating it. If he's not going to take the time to show how he got from point A to B, you decide how he did it when there's an ambush.
+1. I find that when people want something done correctly they do it themselves if someone messes it up for them enough times. In fairness tell him that next time he "teleports" you will determine how he got there.
All players have their likes and dislikes. One of the players in our group hates our critical and fumble card decks, as it (in his mind) makes criticals worthless, since you often end up getting effects instead of multiples of damage.
Talk to him, find a middle ground, and affirm your position as the GM.
Rules lawyers come in two varieties in my experience; the ones who believe the rules should be adhered to in all regards, and the more common one that uses the rules to win. I "rules-lawyer" sometimes as a player if there is an misinterpretation of a rule so glaring that it annoys me/is going on top of our heads dualwielding nerf-bats. But I also GM, so I know better than going too far, as I know how irritating it is to have the flow broken.
Off topic: We use the crit decks too, but I allow the players to do damage or use the cards. Once they pull the card they can't put it back in the deck if they don't like it though.
Blueluck: I know, it's just that I can somewhat sympathize with the player if this is consuming the bulk of the session, and the characters no longer have any focus. I have played sessions where the GM gets caught up in what boils down to mind-numbing tedium, and it just made me annoyed. One GM was so bad I regretted not bringing my tax-papers or some other manner of entertainment.
But if this guy is the kind of guy who does his "teleportation" not because he is bored of playing chutes and ladders, but because he wants to beat the game, sure, penalize him, but if he does it because this is the 78th time he has moved his mini this session, and all he wants to do is be done with the dungeon so he can level up and RP... well, you know which side I will favor.
Blueluck: I know, it's just that I can somewhat sympathize with the player if this is consuming the bulk of the session, and the characters no longer have any focus. I have played sessions where the GM gets caught up in what boils down to mind-numbing tedium, and it just made me annoyed. One GM was so bad I regretted not bringing my tax-papers or some other manner of entertainment.
But if this guy is the kind of guy who does his "teleportation" not because he is bored of playing chutes and ladders, but because he wants to beat the game, sure, penalize him, but if he does it because this is the 78th time he has moved his mini this session, and all he wants to do is be done with the dungeon so he can level up and RP... well, you know which side I will favor.
I see what you mean. I have a pretty strong impression that we're talking about a cheating player, not a tedious GM. Of course, we've only heard from the GM, so my impression could be completely wrong.
We had a similar problem with our LARP, except the guy cheated so much they had to assign a martial to him just to make sure he didn't. The way we solved the problem was having him get killed twice in one event (full weekend), due to his own stupidity and he quit, don't know if that helps.
From what I read from your (OP) posts is that the player behaves like that in off combat situation where you still use combat movement (aka 5' squares) in order to test for traps or ambushes.
Right?
If so then my advice would be: don't!
Use battle mats only when the fight is joined, not before.
If you have your PCs travel use perception and survival skill rolls and let them designate a marching order. This should be enough to determine who is hit and what they notice. If a PC rolls high for perception let him place his figure after the monsters, else you place his figure accordingly as he unwittingly wandered into an ambush.
If no combat is on, remove the mat or at least the figurines to avoid the impression that it is still "combat mat time".
Easy, saves time and prevents the problem you mentioned.
As for the rules lawyering, that's very typical. Amazing how some players conveniently forget rules that might hurt their chances of success, while remembering every possible obscure rule that will help them (sometimes by stretching the intent of the rule to the breaking point).I'm amazed by how often my friend is sent into a pout because I hold him up to the rules. *shakes head*My friends tend to get annoyed when I correct a rule that, when corrected, hurts me, rather than helps me.
Its a habit.
The guy at our table who knows the rules best (not me) tends to do that, to. Extremely honest, even when it hurts the party. People get annoyed with him sometimes, but the GMs all appreciate it and everyone appreciates the honesty. It keeps us from repeating the same rules mistakes over and over until the real rule is forgotten.
Which would be fine, I guess.
I just don't dig some of the fiery rhetoric upthread.
Really? A d4 in his skull?
In any case, communication, open discourse, gentle reminders, blah blah blah. Skipping to passive aggressive vindictiveness or game ejection makes winners of no one.
I was joking. I've never actually thrown my crystal d30 at anyone (although I have threatened a few times).
The d4 incident occurred before I joined the group, but they swear it is true. It didn't imbed in his skull (none in the group have Str scores in the 30s), just broke the skin and stuck. You'd have to know the group I play with and the target in particular to understand. Even he admits it was deserved, and apparently they all nearly killed themselves laughing when it happened.
You'll also note, from my original post, that I'm not one of those engaging in fiery rhetoric, or suggesting the player be booted. I just suggest enforcing the rules consistently for all, and trying to steer rules lawyering into a more productive path.
I do strongly encourage involving the whole group and encouraging peer pressure to help control potentially problem players like selective rules lawyers. The GM is in charge, but everybody has a responsibility to help keep the game honest and fun for everyone.
...
I won't speak for other GMs, so I'll just speak as the OP. The character in question makes zero indication as to the path of movement. He simply picks up his mini and moves it to the desired location, sometimes beyond a normal move action, and assumes that I, as the GM, will adjust how many rounds have transpired accordingly. (Sometimes this means I have to indicate to the other players that they too should make two move actions, and if they want to make a standard action in between let me know and we'll adjudicate that as well.)
...
If he wants to go farther than a move action, fine. Just tell him it takes two rounds to get there and skip his next turn. (And assume he stopped somewhere convenient for you to beat him down along the way.) Then you can keep the other players in normal rounds without adding move actions.
Whats the problem of just saying: No. You can´t reach you destination in the limeted timeframe you have. The round is 6 sec., show me where you move with your regular movement rate oder a double move. If he moves farther adjust his movement into the possible range.
If he still ignores this... search for another player. Get rid of this one. Say "Your PC is dead." If he asks why:"I just forwarded the next encounter. The enemy rolled a tripple 20 and beheaded you. Didn´t you notice? I´m Sorry." (take a scisscor and put off the head of his miniature).
Why would you ever use a BATTLE mat for anything other than a battle?
I mentioned previously that I like using grid maps for the purposes of close quarters dungeon movement. Mostly this is because I'm a primarily visual kinesthetic learner, and it helps me as the GM to more clearly understand PC and NPC positioning and interaction. I'll freely admit that's a flaw of mine, but that's who I am and that's how I GM.
We only use battle mats for big elaborate battles, and my players ALL use the teleporting figures.
I've seen others offer the suggestion to drop grid maps for anything other than really big or really complex battle situations. I'll have to admit I'm giving it some thought. It might really make things easier for everybody if I just keep a mini-map behind my screen and imagine things as they tell them to me. That way I have a visual tool, but they are just storytelling. I'll give that one some thought.
Other GM's when you storytell through combat do you use a lot of spatial and direction references? Example: You notice a well armored orc about 70 feet to your north across some less than ideal terrain... Or how do you describe scenes and NPC movement in those situations?
Perhaps a single game using Vitutal Table Top software with display pathing behavior. Or if you want to drive the point home maybe you can adapt the concept to a physical board by using string or yarn to demonstrate the path in the board.
Usually pathing is done by just dragging the mini across the board but string can highlight it very clearly.
Perhaps a single game using Vitutal Table Top software with display pathing behavior. Or if you want to drive the point home maybe you can adapt the concept to a physical board by using string or yarn to demonstrate the path in the board.
Usually pathing is done by just dragging the mini across the board but string can highlight it very clearly.
semi-tangent
We actually use yo-yo strings to do just this. We also mark out commonly used range incriments, light radii, aoe radii, etc on the side of the grid map and then use the string to see which range incriment shooting a flyer, person on a wall/hill, etc would be.
But then again as one of us works at a print shop we made transparent laminates of some of the burst effects with a 2"x2" hole in the middle. now to find a cheapish slightly larger than 1in and slightly larger than 2in square tubing so we can make flying bases that can be placed over non flyers
As to the behavior, yea the "least favorable" path seems to be the next step followed by the see ya but not at my game if it dosen't work.
I've done both extremes, sometimes running entire scenarios in "storyteller mode", without breaking out my battlemat. Alternatively, I've run games in "tactical mode", where each move is laid out on the battle mat, round by round.
Reading your comments, I'm going to make some guesses. I may be wrong.
My guess is that you have two problems with your player. In the first place, he sees his role as adversarial. He doesn't see you as an impartial arbiter of what happens in the scenario, but more as the opponent running his character's foes.
In the second place, your player is impatient. He knows the rules, knows what he wants to do, and doesn't see why he should consistently limit himself to a round's actions when the party isn't currently in battle.
I understand that you prefer to use minis, but in your shoes, I'd stand down the minis until combat actually comes up. When they don't require detailed tactics, run some entire fights without minis, such as a fight aginst a weaker force in a straight hallway, ten feet wide. By only using minis when detailed tactical movement might make a difference, you'll teach him to take the minis' placement more seriously.
Thank you all for a ton of great advice. I really like the advice, that was repeated by a few people, that I make sure he takes the path of most resistance. I'm pretty sure if/when we get back together for our next session if he continues the "teleport" movement I'll be sure that that happens. I'll definitely be thinking about pulling him aside at some point also, to make clear my expectations for minis and maps as well. Thanks to all who posted advice. I agree that his particular style doesn't mesh well with the others in the group, so removing him all together is a very viable option down the road as well. We'll see what happens.
I strongly suggest you discuss this with him before attempting it. That way, it doesn't come off as adversarial.
If you're tempted to do things that you know will get this guy's dander up, that's a red flag that there's something personal going on between you away from the table. If that's the case, call a spade a spade and get your out-of-game issues settled away from the table; even if the issue is "you're not respecting my game."
If it's not personal, he deserves a short pep-talk about how you're going to resolve his movement before you expect him to submit to the consequences. It's only fair.
So big question here is this during dungeons/combat/etc? or in-town type movement? I am an avid mini lover, i assemble and paint minis as a hobby and I relish the chance to use them in game, but outside of dungeons/combat/etc we hardly ever use them as to avoid the board game feel. Either way almost nothing is more obnoxious than a player being a douche, the enormous favor that you are doing them as being the DM should be more than enough to shut him up, clearly the player is a douche.